1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.10.2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.(MD)No. 11980 of 2011 C.Logandurai ... Petitioner Vs. The Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government, Agricultural Department, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009. .. Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to dispose off the petitioner's representation dated 2.9.2011 to promote the petitioner notionally as Junior Engineer from the date on which his juniors were promoted as Junior Engineer, on merits within a specified time frame that may be fixed by this Court and pass such other orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Visvalingam For Respondent : Mrs.S.Bharathi, Government Advocate O R D E R The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to dispose of his representation dated 02.09.2011, wherein he made a request to promote him as Junior Engineer from the date on which his juniors were promoted as Junior Engineers on merits. 2. Heard Mr.S.Visvalingam, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs.S.Bharathi, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of the respondent. 3. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that as per the consolidated list of diploma holders prepared in the year 1980, he should have given promotion as Junior Engineer on par with 175 persons, who were already promoted. When his turn came for promotion as Junior Engineer, the petitioner was not promoted but directly recruited Foremen were given promotion as Junior Engineers without considering the consolidated list already prepared and implemented in respect of 175 persons. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 5.As he has aggrieved by way discrimination from other 175 persons, who are already promoted, the petitioner has given his representation, considering the request made by the petitioner the Chief Engineer (AE), Chennai, has recommended the case of the petitioner to the Government in his letter No.36094/96 dated 24.07.1996 for consideration of his promotion as Junior Engineer on par with 175 persons. But no action has been taken on the recommendation made by the Head of the Department. Thereafter, the petitioner gave several other representations namely on 02.09.2011 followed by 09.09.2011. As there was no response from the respondent, the petitioner has come to this Court. 6. Since the prayer made in the Writ Petition is limited, this Court is inclined to give only a direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's pending representation dated 02.09.2011. This Court, without going into the merits of the matter, directs the respondent to consider the above representations of the petitioner in accordance with law on merits within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above observation, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. SD ASST REGISTRAR ( CO ) /TRUE COPY/ SUB ASST REGISTRAR am To The Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government,Agricultural Department, Secretariat,Chennai 600 009. DM::2011:NOVEMBER:16:: W.P.(MD)No.11980 of 2011 20.10.2011 2P:2C:: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/