Disposed

S. Ponnuchamy v. the District Collector

Madras HC5 Mar 2014WP(MD)/2822/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a directive for the issuance of a community certificate. The court directed the petitioner to file an application in the proper format, with the respondent required to complete the inquiry within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the petitioner to file an application in the proper format; the respondent to conduct an enquiry and pass appropriate orders within twelve weeks upon receipt.

S. Ponnuchamy Vs the District Collector — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :05.03.2014 CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI

¶4

W.P.(MD)No.2822 of 2014

S.Ponnuchamy

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Trichy District, Trichy.

¶9

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Manapparai, Trichy District.

3.The Tahsildar,

Manapparai Taluk,

Trichy District.

... Respondents

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the 2^nd respondent to issue community certificate to the petitioner and his children, namely (1)Malarvizhi and (2)Theerthan, by considering his representation, dated 04.02.2014, within the period that may be stipulated by this Court.

¶15

(Prayer amended as per order dated 03.03.2014 in M.P.(MD)No.1/2014)

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Gandhi

¶17

For Respondents: Mr.A.K.Baskara Pandian,

¶18

Spl.Govt.Pleader.

¶19

ORDER

¶20

(Order of the Court was made by V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN,J )

¶21

The short prayer with which the petitioner has come-up with the above writ petition is to direct the 2^nd respondent to issue community certificate to him as well as to his two children.

¶22

2.Heard Mr.R.Gandhi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.A.K.Baskara Pandian, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents.

¶23

3.According to the petitioner, he is an agricultural coolie, belonging to "Oorali" community, which is classified as a Scheduled Tribe. The petitioner claims that his father purchased landed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ properties during the period 1922 and 1942 and that his fore-fathers had settled in a place called 'Ooralichi Karadu'.

¶24

¶25

4.The further claim of the petitioner is that in 1981-82, his relatives got community certificates. Therefore, when the petitioner admitted his children in school, he claims to have mentioned their community as "Oorali".

¶26

5.Since the petitioner as well as his children did not get

¶27

community certificate, he applied on 04.02.2014. But, the application does not appear to be in the proper form.

¶28

6.Therefore, considering the limited nature of the prayer made, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to file an application, in the proper format, before the 2^nd respondent for the issue of community certificate, for himself and to his children. Upon receipt of such an application, in the prescribed format, the 2^nd respondent shall conduct an enquiry, in accordance with law, look into the records and pass appropriate orders within a period of twelve weeks. No costs.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar

\True copy\

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶33

¶34

1.The District Collector,

¶35

Trichy District, Trichy.

¶36

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,

¶37

Manapparai,

¶38

Trichy District.

¶39

3.The Tahsildar,

¶40

Manapparai Taluk, Trichy District.

¶41

+1cc to the Spl.Govt.Pleader Sr.No.14122

¶42

ORDER IN W.P.(MD)No.2822/2014 Dated:05.03.2014

¶43

¶44

NA/14/03/2014/P2/5C

¶45

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

S. Ponnuchamy v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Ponnuchamy 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

The Commissioner, Vs R. Venkatramani

Tamil Nadu Generation and Vs Sundaram Industries Limited

The Principal Secretary to Vs P.Saravanakumar

R.Elavarasan, Vs the Secretary

Micheal, Vs the District Collector

K.R.Bhalaiah, Vs the Chairman