K. Karthik vs The Chief Engineer, Executive Engineer, Agricultural Engineering Department and Assistant Executive Engineer (AE)

M. Jaichandren, J.—Heard Mr. Jeyaprakash, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, as well as Mr. R. Manoharan, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondents.

At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if the subsidy application of the Petitioner, dated 11.11.2010, is directed to be disposed of, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period.

The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents, has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court.

In view of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of this Respondents, has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court. petition and in view of the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, the first Respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the Petitioner''s subsidy application, dated 11.11.2010, on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, not later than twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Petitioner is directed to submit a copy of the subsidy application, dated 11.11.2010, along with a copy of this order, to the first Respondent. However, it is made clear, that this Court, by this order, has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.

The writ petition stands disposed of, with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.