Disposed

V.Sundararajan v. the District Collector

Madras HC16 Jul 2019WA/1845/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an intra-court appeal regarding a writ petition challenging a charge memo, the High Court of Judicature at Madras directed the respondent to furnish documents. The court clarified that the subsequent enquiry by the District Collector would be strictly confined to the documents included in the typed set of papers produced before it.

What did the court decide?

Direction to District Collector to confine enquiry to documents in the typed set of papers produced before the Court.

V.Sundararajan Vs the District Collector — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 16.07.2019

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN

¶5

and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE Ms.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA

¶7

and CMP.No.12495 of 2019

V. Sundararajan

...Appellant

-Vs-

The District Collector, Villupuram.

¶12

..Respondent

¶13

Prayer:- Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated 06.02.2019 made in W.P.No.1486 of 2018.

¶14

Prayer in W.P.No.1486 of 2018:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of the Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the respondent vide proceeding No. Roc.No.A1/ 10067/ 2017 dated 02.08.2017 and to quash the same.

¶15

For Appellant : Mr.S.Vijayakumar For Respondent : Mrs.A.Sri Jayanthi Special Government Pleader

¶16

(Judgment of the Court was made by K.K.SASIDHARAN,J.)

¶17

The learned single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the appellant challenging the charge memo dated 02.08.2017. The said order is under challenge at the instance of the unsuccessful petitioner.

¶18

When this appeal came up for admission, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant would be satisfied in case the documents referred to in the annexure to the charge memo are furnished to him so as to enable him to defend the enquiry.

¶19

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

¶20

We therefore directed the District Collector, Villupuram to furnish the documents relied on by him in the annexure to the charge memo to the appellant. The matter was adjourned on multiple occasions so as to enable the District Collector to furnish the documents.

¶21

The District Collector, Villupuram has filed an affidavit dated 03.07.2019 indicating that the documents which would be relied on by him during the course of enquiry are included in the typed set of papers produced before this Court. The documents are given in the typed set of papers from pages 1 to 539. The District Collector in paragraph 3 of the affidavit made it clear that only the documents included in the typed set alone would be relied on during the course of enquiry.

¶22

The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant collected certain information with regard to the diary maintained by the RDO/Sub-Collector. According to the appellant no such inspection was ever conducted by RDO/Sub-Collector from 01.02.2017 to 28.02.2017 for verification of the beneficiaries under the OAP Scheme as referred to in the annexure to the charge memo dated 02.08.2018.

¶23

The respondent has made it clear that only the documents in the typed set produced before this Court would be used for the enquiry. In case, the appellant is of the view that there are other documents to substantiate his contention, it is always open to him to file appropriate application for summoning the records during the course of enquiry.

¶24

We make it clear that only the documents produced in the typed set of papers should be used for the enquiry as exhibits.

¶25

The categorical statement made by the District Collector that the enquiry would be confined to the documents produced before this Court in the form of typed set of papers is recorded.

¶26

The intra Court appeal is disposed of with the above observation. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

Assistant Registrar(CS V)

¶29

//True Copy//

¶30

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶31

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

¶32

¶33

The District Collector, Villupuram.

¶34

+1cc to Mr.S.Vijayakumar, Advocate Sr.60116 +1cc to the Government Pleader Sr.61239

¶35

W.A.No.1845 of 2019
and CMP.No.12495 of 2019
pp[co]
srg 12/09/2019

¶36

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

V.Sundararajan v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Sundararajan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Kannappa Chettiyar Vs State Human Rights Commission, Tamil Nadu

V.R.Pradapkumar, Vs Union of India

R.Anurajan Vs Government of India

Union of India Vs the Central Administrative

The State of Tamilnadu Vs P.Siva Shanmugam

E.Saravanan Vs The Registrar General