?BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT %DATED: 22.10.2018 *CORAM THE HON-BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN +W.P.(MD) No.21540 of 2018 #I.Poongodi, Wife of P.Sundararaj, Headmistress of Middle School, Panchayat Union Middle School, Mannadimangalam, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District. .. Petitioner Vs. $1.The Director of Elementary School Education, Office of the Director of Elementary School Education, Chennai. 2.The District Elementary Educational Officer, Office of the District Elementary Educational Officer, Madurai. 3.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Office of the Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Vadipatti. .. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 herein to consider the Petitioner-s representation dated 16.2.2016 and 4.9.2017 to rectify the pay anomaly of the Petitioner, within the time frame fixed by this Court. !For Petitioner : Mr.K.Muthu Ganesa Pandian ^For Respondents : Mrs.S.Srimathi Special Govt.Pleader :ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed,for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 herein to consider the Petitioner-s representations, dated 16.2.2016 and 4.9.2017 to rectify the pay anomaly of the Petitioner, within the time frame fixed by this Court. 2.Mrs.S.Srimathi, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. By consent of both parties, the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. 3.When the matter is taken up for hearing today, it is represented by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that against the rejection order passed by the third respondent, the Petitioner has made representations to the second respondent and the same is pending. 4.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the second respondent has already rejected the request of the Petitioner and produced a communication, dated 28.05.2018. From the communication dated 28.5.2018, it is clear that there is no order of rejection, but the second respondent has called for certain records. 5.If the representations dated 16.2.2016 and 4.9.2017 have not been disposed of as on date, the second respondent is directed to dispose of the same within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after hearing the petitioner in person. If the Petitioner fails to appear for hearing on the specified date given by the second respondent, it is open to the second respondent to pass orders and in that event, the Petitioner shall not contend that he was not given a chance of personal hearing by the second respondent. 6.With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. To: 1.The Director of Elementary School Education, Office of the Director of Elementary School Education, Chennai. 2.The District Elementary Educational Officer, Office of the District Elementary Educational Officer, Madurai. 3.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Office of the Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Vadipatti.