Allowed

V. Soundaravalli v. the District Collector

Madras HC17 Apr 2013WP(MD)/1386/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition filed by Vice President of a Village Panchayat seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the District Collector to consider her representation regarding alleged misappropriation of funds by a former Panchayat President. The court directed the first respondent to dispose of the representation within four months.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to the first respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 14.08.2012 on merits within four months.

V. Soundaravalli Vs the District Collector — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 17.04.2013

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.1386 of 2013

V.Soundaravalli

: Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector cum Inspector of Panchayats, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

¶11

2.The Assistant Director (Panchayats), Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

¶12

3.The Block Development Officer, Kamuthi Panchayat Union, Ramanathapuram District.

¶13

4.G.Velmurugan : Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 14.08.2012 and pass orders.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Muthusamy

¶16

For Respondents 1&2 : Mr.N.S.Karthikeyan Additional Government Pleader

¶17

For Respondent 3 : Mr.R.Anandraj Government Advocate For Respondent 4 : Mr.C.Mayilvahana Rajendran

¶18

O R D E R ***********

¶19

The petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus directing the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ District Collector, Ramanathapuram, to consider and dispose of the representation dated 14.08.2012 on merits.

¶20

¶21

The petitioner is stated to be the Vice President of Peraiyoor Village Panchayat, Kamuthi Panchayat Union, Ramanathampuram District. The fourth respondent functioned as the President of panchayat earlier. He was also a registered contractor under the panchayat. According to the petitioner, the fourth respondent, while functioning as the President of the panchayat, misappropriated the money belonging to the panchayat. The fourth respondent prepared bogus bills and claimed money from the panchayat. The petitioner submitted a representation to the first respondent on 14.08.2012, requesting the District Collector to take appropriate action against the fourth respondent. Since there was no follow up action taken by the District Collector to consider and dispose of the representation, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶22

This Court has granted sufficient time to the fourth respondent to file counter. When the Writ Petition came up for hearing on 28.03.2013, the learned counsel for the fourth respondent wanted further time to file counter. The matter was directed to be posted finally on 10.04.2013 for filing counter and disposal. When the Writ Petition came up for hearing on 10.04.2013, it was adjourned to today. Even today, the fourth respondent has not filed counter affidavit. In view of earlier adjournments, I am not inclined to accept the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner for extending time.

¶23

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶24

The petitioner wanted the District Collector to consider and dispose of her representation dated 14.08.2012 on merits.

¶25

The question as to whether the fourth respondent misappropriated the funds of the panchayat is essentially an issue to be decided by the first respondent. The petitioner has already approached the District Collector with a representation. It is open to the District Collector to consider and dispose of the said representation on merits.

¶26

The first respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 14.08.2012, on merits and as per law with notice to the fourth respondent. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶27

The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

¶28

Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶29

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶30

/ True Copy/

¶31

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶32

¶33

¶34

1.The District Collector cum Inspector of Panchayats, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

¶35

2.The Assistant Director (Panchayats), Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

¶36

3.The Block Development Officer, Kamuthi Panchayat Union, Ramanathapuram District.

¶37

+1cc to Mr. C.Mayil Vahana Rajendran, Advocate, Sr.No.21710 +1cc to Mr.P. Muthusamy, Advocate, Sr.No.21803 +1cc to Mr. Spl. Govt. Pleader, Sr.No.22197

¶38

¶39

MM/03.05.2013 /2p-7c// ORDER MADE IN

¶40

W.P.(MD)No.1386 of 2013 17.04.2013

¶41

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

V. Soundaravalli v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V. Soundaravalli v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S. Ganapathy, Vs the Superintendent of Police

Devi Corporation,a Partnership Vs the Superintendent of Police

V. Ponnazhagu, Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

M/S. Vasantham Catering, Vs the Senior Divisional

M. Sappani @ Ramasami Servai, Vs Tamil Nadu Water Supply and

M/S. Cholamandalam Vs the District Revenue Officer