1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 01.02.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.DHANAPALAN Writ Petition (MD).No.1143 of 2011 & M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2011 R.Ramamurthy . . Petitioner Vs. 1.The Secretary and Commissioner of Agricultural Production, Agriculture Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Chief Engineer,Agricultural Engineering Department, 487, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035. ..Respondents Prayer:- Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the request of the petitioner, dated 13.12.2010 and to regularize the service of the petitioner and to appoint the petitioner as Assistant Engineer in the respondents' department on par with his co- employees. For Petitioner : Mr.Veerakathiravan For Respondents: Mr.V.Rajasekaran, Special Government Pleader ORDER By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself. 2. Heard Mr.Veerakathiravan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.V.Rajasekaran, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. 3. The prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to the first respondent to consider his request, dated 13.12.2010 and to regularise his services and to appoint him as Assistant Engineer in the respondents' department on par with his co-employees. 4. The grievance of the petitioner appears that he is an engineering graduate having completed B.E. Agriculture in the Coimbatore Agricultural University, he is eligible to hold the post of Assistant Engineer in the respondent department. He was appointed as Technical Assistant on daily wages from 1994 to 1995 in a scheme employment of the second respondent department. Similarly, the second respondent also employed several persons as Assistant Engineers, Junior Engineers, Technical Assistants on daily wages. It is the claim of the petitioner that as per the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.138, Agriculture (AA3) Department, dated 20.03.1995, the temporary employees of the department have to be regularised. In this regard, the petitioner has made a representation to the first respondent on 13.12.2010. Pending consideration of the same, the petitioner is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 before this Court for the above direction. 5. After elaborate arguments and discussions, the learned counsel for the petitioner would make a plea that if the detailed representation made by the petitioner on 13.12.2010 is disposed of, then the grievance of the petitioner would be redressed. Therefore, the petitioner is restricted his relief to the extent of directing the first respondent to consider his representation. In the light of the above circumstances and in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the first respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 13.12.2010 and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law and on merits, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. SD DEPUTY REGISTRAR ( WRITS ) /TRUE COPY/ ASST REGISTRAR jikr To 1.The Secretary and Commissioner of Agricultural Production, Agriculture Department,Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Chief Engineer, Agricultural Engineering Department, 487, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035. 1CC TO MR VEERA.KATHIRAVAN, ADVOCATE, SR: 4013: 1CC TO THE SPL. GOVT PLEADER SR: 4066: DM:2011:FEBRUARY:22::: Order made in W.P.(MD).No.1143 of 2011 01.02.2011 2P:5C:: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/