IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24.02.2010 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R. SUDHAKAR W.P.No. 6957 of 2006 (OA.No.7728 of 1999) K. JAMBULINGAM .. PETITIONER Vs 1 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER AND COMMISSIONER FOR REVENUE ADMN. CHEPAUK, CHENNAI - 5. 2 THE COLLECTOR OF CHENNAI COLLECTORATE CHENNAI-1. .. RESPONDENTS Prayer Original Application No. 7728 of 1999 was filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench to issue a direction to call for the records relating to the order passed by the first respondent in A1/PDL/352/97 dated 17.03.98 (wrongly typed as 17.03.97) quash the same in so far as the petitioner is concerned and further direct the respondents to include the petitioners name in the panel fit for promotion to the post of Deputy Tahsildar and promote him as Deputy Tahsildar and place him in the year 1997 in the appropriate place over and above his junior and to pay all monetary and other benefits. Since the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal was abolished, the O.A. was transferred and numbered as Writ petition. For Petitioner : Mr. Prabhu for Mr. A. Thirumurthy For Respondent : Mr. S. Sivashanmugam, Government Advocate ORDER Original Application No. 7728 of 1999 was filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench to issue a direction to call for the records relating to the order passed by the first respondent in A1/PDL/352/97 dated 17.03.98 (wrongly typed as 17.03.97) quash the same in so far as the petitioner is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ concerned and further direct the respondents to include the petitioners name in the panel fit for promotion to the post of Deputy Tahsildar and promote him as Deputy Tahsildar and place him in the year 1997 in the appropriate place over and above his junior and to pay all monetary and other benefits. Since the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal was abolished, the O.A. was transferred and numbered as Writ petition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that claim for inclusion in the panel for the promotion to the post of Deputy Tahsildar was not considered for the year 1997. However, the counsel states that the petitioner has preferred an appeal to the first respondent, which has not been disposed of so far and prays for a direction to dispose off the appeal. 3. Heard Mr. S. Shivashanmugam, Government Advocate. In view of the statement made by the counsel for the petitioner that the appeal said to have been filed before the first respondent has not yet been considered. The first respondent is directed to considered and disposed of the appeal on merits within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. sms Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar To 1 THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER AND COMMISSIONER FOR REVENUE ADMN. CHEPAUK, CHENNAI - 5. 2 THE COLLECTOR OF CHENNAI COLLECTORATE CHENNAI-1. + 1 cc to Government Pleader, SR No.12851 RSM(CO) SR/9.3.2010 W.P.No. 6957 of 2006 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/