1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:21.06.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN W.P.(MD)No.6439 of 2011 R.Santhi : Petitioner Vs. 1.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai-600 006. 2.The Chief Educational Officer, Tallakulam, Madurai-625 002. 3.The District Educational Officer, District Educational Office, Madurai. 4.The Secretary of the T.N.School Education Department, Secretariat, Chennai. : Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the fourth respondent to dispose of the petitioner's appeal dated 24.01.2008 by considering her grievances, within a stipulated period of 15 days. For Petitioner : M/s.V.Pavel For Respondents : Mr.S.Chandrasekar Government Advocate ORDER ****** Mr.S.Chandrasekar, learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 3. The petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition for a Mandamus, directing the fourth respondent to dispose of her appeal dated 24.01.2008, by considering her grievances, within a stipulated period of fifteen days. 4. The case of the petitioner is that her father one R.Raju was working as a Watchman in the Government High School at I.Puliyankulam, within the limits of the second and third respondents. During his service period, he suddenly demised on 04.07.1992. She has applied to the respondents for employment on compassionate ground. The third respondent https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 recommended to the first respondent for giving employment to her through his proceeding dated 11.04.2006. The office of the first respondent also, considering the pathetic condition of the petitioner, issued an order of allotment for job as a Junior Assistant on compassionate ground, which was forwarded to the second respondent. However, the second respondent, without complying with the directions of the first respondent, once against started to enquire about the petitioner. Thereafter, it seems that a report has been sent to the first respondent and on the basis of the same, the first respondent rejected the proposal made earlier. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the fourth respondent. Since the said appeal was not disposed of so far, the petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition for the reliefs stated earlier. 5. Considering the limited scope of the matter, without expressing any opinion on the claim made by the petitioner, I direct the fourth respondent to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner dated 24.01.2008 on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. The Writ Petition stands ordered accordingly. No costs. SML Sd/- Deputy Registrar[Accounts] /True copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai-600 006. 2.The Chief Educational Officer, Tallakulam, Madurai-625 002. 3.The District Educational Officer, District Educational Office, Madurai. 4.The Secretary of the T.N.School Education Department, Secretariat, Chennai. +1 cc to the Special Government Pleader, SR.No.19674. Order made in W.P.(MD)No.6439 of 2011 Dated:21.06.2011 2P/6C RPB 28.06.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/