Judgment · High Court

ORDER In the instant case, petItIoner has souCht mandamus, directing the respondents 2 an d 3 th c insider the representation,s dated. 24/6/201. 1, 6/8/2011 and 1+I /9/2011, VICe AIllCXUrcSC, P and G. respectively and to implement the order date.d 8/6/2011 passed in WP o66922/)010 vide VV I JIJI JJ( _ILLti 3rd respondent consider representation 27/8/2011 vide Anriexure-F.

The only grievance of the learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset that, he has a WP No.b6222/2.010. assailing the correctness of the endorsement dated 4/5/2010 issued by the Commissioner, Directorate of Town and Municipal Administration, Bangalore Annexure-B, The said writ petition came up for consideration before this Court on 8/6/2011 arid the said writ petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to file fresh representation and if one such representation is made within two weeks from that day, the Commissioner, Directorate. of Town and Municipal Adm.inistration, Bangalore, consider the sam . in aeeor..dance with ia.w wIthin 3 month that day, without bein Influenced by the said endorsement,

After disposal of the said writ petition, petitioner has submitted several representations the. respondent autH()rt.s I or on3jc nra! his reciuest or promotion br 4 higher cadre. Neither the 2M respondent nor 3nt respondent has taken any decision. Therefore, the petitioner has this writ petition seeking appropriate relief as stated supra.

After perusal of the material on records and after hearing the counsel appearing for both the parties, the only grievance of the petitioner is that he has submitted the detailed representations dated 24/6/2011, 6/8/2011 and 14/9/2011, vide Annexures-C, E and G, respectively, and they are not considered till date.

After disposal of the writ petition No.66222/20 10 dated 8/6/2011 the respondent Nos. 2 and 3, being the statutory authorities consider representations of the petitioner and dispose of the same In accordance with law, uninfluenced by the endorsement dated 4/5/20 10 issued by the second respondent In earlier round litigation. Keeping their request In abeyance is not justifiable. Therefore, it would suffice for this Court to issue a direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider representations vide Annexures C, E and 0 and dispose of the same, as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a period of four months from the da te of receipt of copy of this order if not already considered and disposed of, Ordered accordingly. Learned Government Pleader is permitted to file memo of appearance for respondents within 4 weeks. Sd/ JULJL’ Vmb/tsn*