K.Panchamani v. The Inspector General of Registration

ORDER Heard the learned counsel on either side.

2.The petitioner has given the petition mentioned representation for taking action against the third respondent. In such matters the writ Court will not be justified in issuing any positive direction. It is for the employer concerned to take a decision. Leaving the matter entirely the discretion of the first respondent to take a call in the matter, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

12.04.2023 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No NCC : Yes / No MGA To

1.The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai – 600 028.

2.The District Registrar, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

3.The Sub Registrar, Nilakottai Sub Registrar Office, Nilakottai, Dindigul District.

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. MGA

12.04.2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 12.04.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN K.Panchamani ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai – 600 028. 2.The District Registrar, Dindigul District, Dindigul. 3.The Sub Registrar, Nilakottai Sub Registrar Office, Nilakottai, Dindigul District. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to take necessary action on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 25.02.2023 with regard to initiate Departmental Proceedings against the third respondent within a time frame fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Anbarasu For Respondents : Mr.C.Saravanan Additional Government Pleader