Disposed

L. Alagarsamy v. the Revenue Divisional

Madras HC15 Apr 2016WP(MD)/1622/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ of Mandamus directing first respondent to issue Community Certificate to his children. Court directed respondent to complete pending enquiry and pass orders within one month without deciding merits.

What did the court decide?

First respondent directed to complete enquiry and pass appropriate orders within one month; petitioner directed to furnish all supporting materials.

L. Alagarsamy Vs the Revenue Divisional — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 15.04.2016

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.1622 of 2015

L.Alagarsamy

.. Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai.

¶11

2.The Tahsildar, Madurai South. .. Respondents

¶12

PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to issue Community Certificate to his children A.Krishnapriyan and A.Ramesh evidencing the fact that they belong to Malaivedan Community in consonance with the community certificate issued to him by the 2^nd respondent on 23.11.1981 on the basis of his representation, dated 07.11.2014.

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

(The order of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J.)

¶15

Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶16

2.This writ petition has been filed for issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to issue Community Certificate to the petitioner's children that they belong to 'Malaivedan Community'. The petitioner has also relied upon the Community Certificate issued to him and transfer certificate issued to his son and other documents.

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.On instructions, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that they are aware of the

¶18

¶19

application filed by the petitioner and that they are conducting enquiry. As a matter of fact, by the communication, dated 25.03.2016, the petitioner has been directed to appear for the enquiry on 22.04.2016, before the Revenue Divisional Officer. He would also submit that the enquiry will be conducted and orders will be passed within a period of one month from today.

¶20

4.The said statement of the learned Additional Government Pleader is placed on record.

¶21

5.Without going into merits of the matter, we only direct the first respondent to complete the enquiry and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of one month from today and the petitioner is also directed to furnish all the materials and documents in support of his claim before the first respondent.

¶22

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶23

/True copy/

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

¶26

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai.

¶27

2.The Tahsildar, Madurai South, Madurai.

¶28

+one cc to The Special Government Pleader in SR.No. 21424 rj2

¶29

CSL/SKS-RR/03.05.2016 : 2p/4c

¶30

Order made in W.P.(MD)No.1622 of 2015 15.04.2016

¶31

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

L. Alagarsamy v. the Revenue Divisional

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L. Alagarsamy v. the Revenue Divisional

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

P.Ramesh, S/O.Periyadurai Vs the District Collector

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs the Correspondent

The State of Tamilnadu Vs A.K. Shimila

The Government of Tamil Nadu Vs a.Palaniappan

The Secretary to School Vs H.Shahul Hameed

The Government of Tamil Nadu Vs Lillis Mary