Disposed

K.Gunasekaran, v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC6 Apr 2017WP/8158/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition by directing the Revenue Divisional Officer to decide the petitioner's application for a community certificate indicating 'Kattunayakan (ST) Community' status within three months without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Revenue Divisional Officer to decide the application for a Scheduled Tribe Community Certificate within three months.

K.Gunasekaran, Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 06.04.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN AND THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN

¶5

W.P.No.8158 of 2017

¶6

K.Gunasekaran ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The Revenue Divisional Officer Tiruvannamalai Tiruvannamalai District. .. Respondent

¶9

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, to consider and pass orders on the application of the petitioner dated 30.01.2017 and reminder dated 27.02.207 for the issuance of certificate to the petitioner's children viz.,1. G.Jothimani and 2.G.Vaitheeshwari that they belong to "Kattunayakan (ST) Community" based upon the community certificate already issued to the petitioner's own brother K.Murugesan's daughter Parameshwari.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Doraisamy

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.K.Thananjayan Special Government Pleader

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

K.K.SASIDHARAN,J.

¶14

The petitioner submitted application before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruvannamalai, requesting to issue Community Certificates to his children G.Jothimani and G.Vaitheeshwari, indicating that they belong to "Kattunayakan", which is a notified Schedule Tribe Community. The application was submitted on 30 January 2017. The petitioner sent a reminder on 27 February 2017. Since follow up action was not taken by the Revenue Divisional Officer, the petitioner has come up with this writ petition.

¶15

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

¶16

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader on behalf of the respondent.

¶17

The respondent herein is directed to consider and dispose of the application submitted by the petitioner, dated 30 January, 2017 for Community Certificate on merits and as per law. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶18

We make it clear that the direction issued should not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the matter. In short, the application, should be decided in accordance with law and in the light of the settled legal principles in the matter governing the issuance of Scheduled Tribe Certificate.

¶19

The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

¶20

Sd/Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar svki To The Revenue Divisional Officer Tiruvannamalai Tiruvannamalai District.

¶21

+1cc to Mr.S. Doraisamy, Advocate Sr. 20762

¶22

W.P.No.8158 of 2017 CA(CO) VR(21/4/2017)

¶23

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

K.Gunasekaran, v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Gunasekaran, v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

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.T.Kanchana Vs The Headquarters Deputy

S.Pushpasekaran Vs The Regional Director(S.R)

P.Chandrasekar Vs The Chairman-cum-

Dr.S.Vasudevan, Vs Union of India, Rep.by

A.Uma Vs The District Collector

M.Prakash Vs The Sub Collector