Disposed

V.Govindarajan, v. Directorate of Town Panchayath

Madras HC11 Apr 2016WP/9062/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposed of a writ petition seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus to compel the Director of Town Panchayath and District Collector to act on a representation regarding Panchayat administration. The court granted liberty to the petitioner to pursue the representation within three months.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to pursue representation before the District Collector within three months after notice to all concerned.

V.Govindarajan, Vs Directorate of Town Panchayath — Municipal and Town Planning | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 11.04.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶5

Writ Petition No.9062 of 2016

¶6

V.Govindarajan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. Directorate of Town Panchayath
IV Floor Kuralagam Chennai-600 104.
2. The District Collector
O/o. The District Collector Collectorate
Coimbatore-641 018.
3. B.Ashok Kumar
Executive Officer Presently at
Moopiripalayam Municipality
Vaagarayampalayam Coimbatore-641 659.
4. Mr. J.Jaganathan
Executive Officer Thenkarai Mathipalayam
Mathipalayam Post Coimbatore-641 101.
5. D.Sakthivel ... Respondents

¶7

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 1 & 2 to expeditiously take action on the representation of the petitioner dated 11.01.2016 within a stipulated period.

¶8

For Petitioner : M/s.R.Anitha

¶9

For Respondents : Mr.R.Rajeswaran, Special Government Pleader for R1 and 2

¶10

No Appearance for R3 to 5

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2.

¶12

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

¶13

Petitioner is an elected member of the village Panchayat and he expresses very serious concern about the manner in which the 5^th respondent, the President of Panchayat has administered the affairs of the Panchayat and managed its finances. The petitioner would admit that a motion of no confidence was brought about by the ward members, but the 5^th respondent has successfully stalled the proceedings by obtaining an order of stay from this Court.

¶14

In any event, the petitioner has placed certain facts for consideration of the 2^nd respondent, which prima facie shows there are several irregularities. However, this Court does not wish to express any opinion in the matter, since the 5^th respondent has not entered appearance through counsel, though he has been served with notice.

¶15

In the light of the above, liberty is granted to the petitioner to pursue his representation before the 2^nd respondent, which shall be considered by the 2^nd respondent in accordance with law, after notice to all concerned including the 5^th respondent as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶16

Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Directorate of Town Panchayath IV Floor Kuralagam Chennai-600 104. 2.The District Collector O/o. The District Collector Collectorate Coimbatore-641 018. +1cc to M/s.R.Anitha, Advocate, S.R.No.22828 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.22770

¶17

Writ Petition No.9062 of 2016 SR(CO) CA(26/04/2016)

¶18

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

V.Govindarajan, v. Directorate of Town Panchayath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Govindarajan, v. Directorate of Town Panchayath

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

Gangai Konda Cholapuram Vs M.Mohan

P.Anbarasan, Vs Rajaram

G.Vasanthi Vs State of Tamilnadu

B.Ambikapathi, Vs The Principal Secretary to

N.Kalayana Sundaram, Vs The Deputy Registrar of

M.Balaraman, Vs the District Collector