BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 7/3/2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN W.P.(MD) No.2643 of 2011 A. Kavitha ... Petitioner Vs 1. The Secretary to Government Revenue Department Secretariat Chennai 600 009. 2. The Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Revenue Administration Ezhilagam, Chepauk Chennai 600 005. ... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent to pass appropriate orders on the proposals sent by the second respondent in his letter No.Ser-3(4)/52661/10 dated 21/9/2010 on merits within a specified time frame. For petitioner ... Mr.S.Visvalingam For respondents ... Mr.V.Rajasekaran, Spl.G.P. O R D E R Mr.V.Rajasekaran, Special Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. The petitioner has come up with the present writ petition for a mandamus directing the first respondent to pass appropriate orders on the proposal sent by the second respondent in his letter dated 21/9/2010 on merits within a specified time frame. 4. The case of the petitioner is that he was recruited through Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission in the year 1993 and joined duty as Junior Assistant in the Taluk Office, Kalkulam. Later, he was promoted as Assistant in the year 1998 and joined duty in the Collectorate, Nagercoil. He was again promoted as Deputy Tahsildar in the year 2007 and presently, he is serving as Head Assistant in the cadre of Deputy Tahsildar in the office of the District Supply Officer, Nagercoil. 5. His seniority in the cadre of Assistant was revised on his representation and as per the report sent by the District Collector, Kanyakumari in his proceeding dated 9/1/2008 and the orders of the second respondent in his letter dated 3/3/2008. Consequently, on the revision of his seniority in the cadre of Assistant, the District Collector, Kanyakumari sent his report to the second respondent for the inclusion of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ his name in the list of Deputy Tahsildars of the year 2007 and accordingly, the second respondent has passed orders by his proceeding dated 12/8/2008. 6. The petitioner, thereafter, made a representation to the District Collector, Kanyakumari that his juniors have already completed their probation and they are qualified for inclusion in the list of Tahsildar. Due to no fault of the petitioner, in view of the above action, the petitioner could not undergo a period of two years probation. Therefore, the District Collector, Kanyakumari, recommended his case to the second respondent for relaxation of the provisions referred to above. The second respondent, in turn, has recommended his case to the Government. The said proposal has been sent to the Government by his proceeding dated 21/9/2010. But, till date, the first respondent has not passed any orders which made the petitioner to approach this Court. 7. Considering the limited scope of the matter and without expressing any opinion on the claim made by the petitioner, I direct the first respondent to pass appropriate orders on the proposal sent by the second respondent in his letter dated 21/9/2010 on merits and in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. This writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (Accounts) /True copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1. The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat Chennai 600 009. 2. The Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Revenue Administration Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005. +1 CC to Mr. S.Visvalingam, Advocate, SR.No.11492 mvs. W.P.(MD) No.2643 of 2011 7/3/2011 TR : 25.03.2011 : 2p/4c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/