Petitioner challenged a memorandum calling for explanation regarding an enquiry into his Community Certificate under Article 226. The Court held the writ was premature as no final decision had been taken. Petition dismissed.
No costs. Consequently, W.M.Ps. are closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ORDERS RESERVED ON: 28.08.2019 ORDERS PRONOUNCED ON :5.9.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
W.P.NO.6660 OF 2019
AND
W.M.P.NOS.7485 AND 7486 OF 2019
K.Ranganathan .. Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Director,
Tribal Welfare Department,
Chepauk,
Chennai-600 005.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Mettur,
Salem District.
3. The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Social Justice and Human Rights Unit,
Line Medu,
Salem District. .. Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records of the first respondent notice Na.Ka.No.PaMe/AA1/3510/2017, dated 28.11.2018, enquiry report of the second respondent C.Pa.19/2018(D), dated 21.08.2018 and report of the third respondent C.No.61/ACP/SJHR/Salem City/2017, dated 20.11.2018 and quash the same and direct the second and third respondents to conduct the re-enquiry re-verify petitioner's Community Certificate in the light of the guidelines issued in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil reported in 1994 (6) SCC 241 and G.O.Ms.No.106, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare (CV-I) Department, dated 15.10.2012.
For petitioner : Mr.N.Naganathan For respondents : Mr.V.Shanmuga Sundar, Spl.G.P.
ORDER
R.SUBBIAH, J
The petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records of the first respondent notice Na.Ka.No.PaMe/AA1/3510/2017, dated 28.11.2018, enquiry report of the second respondent C.Pa.19/2018(D), dated 21.08.2018 and report of the third respondent C.No.61/ACP/SJHR/Salem City/2017, dated 20.11.2018 and quash the same and direct the second and third respondents to conduct the re-enquiry / re-verify the petitioner's Community Certificate in the light of the guidelines issued in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil reported in 1994 (6) SCC 241 and G.O.Ms.No.106, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare (CV-I) Department, dated 15.10.2012.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CO)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
cs
To
1. The Director, Tribal Welfare Department,
Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mettur, Salem District.
3. The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Social Justice and Human Rights Unit,
Line Medu, Salem District.
+1cc to Mr.N.Naganathan, Advocate, S.R.No.77289
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.77731
W.P.No.6660 of 2019
EV(CO)
CS/25/10/2019
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can intervene in the enquiry proceedings against the petitioner's Community Certificate at the stage where only a memorandum calling for explanation was served.
Whether the petitioner's Writ Petition challenging a memorandum is premature before the final decision of the enquiry authorities.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kumari Madhuri PatilReferred¶6
Kumari Madhuri Patil reported in 1994 (6) SCC 241 · Who else cites this
K.Ranganathan
The Director, Tribal Welfare Department
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Mettur
The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Social Justice and Human Rights Unit
R.SUBBIAH
C.SARAVANAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
R.SUBBIAH and C.SARAVANAN
Parties & counsel
