The Madras High Court dismissed a review petition filed against an order directing a Principal Sub-Judge to hold an enquiry. The court held no error was apparent on the face of the record as the direction was purely administrative.
The Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed for review is dismissed.
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.
CMP(MD) No.1141 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )
Wednesday, the Twelfth day of February Two Thousand Twenty
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Ms.Justice P.T.ASHA
CMP(MD) No.1141 of 2020 in Rev.Aplc(MD)SR.No.2676 of 2020
S.KRISHNA RAJAN ... PETITIONER/ 3rd PARTY
1 ALAGU LAKSHMI ... REVISION PETITIONER/ DEFENDANT
2 DURAI PANDIYAN ... RESPONDENT/ PLAINTIFF
Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to grant leave to the petitioner to prefer the present Review Petition in Rev.App.SR.No.2676/2020 and thus render justice.
PRAYER IN Rev.Aplc(MD)SR.No.2676 of 2020:
To review the order passed in C.R.P.(MD)No.1583 of 2011 dated 01.10.2019 passed by this Hon'ble Court in so far as the observation made in the 17th paragraph, with respect to directing the Principal Sub Judge, Dindigul in Holding Enquiry as against the Court Staff.
ORDER : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.T.LAJAPATHI ROY, Advocate for the petitioner, the court made the following order:-
(Today through video conferencing this matter was heard by Her Lordships in the Principal Seat of Madras High Court)
The only ground on which the review of this Court's order dated 01.10.2019 has been filed is with reference to the following statement:
“The learned Principal Judge is directed to hold an enquiry in this regard and take action against the concerned staff and report to this Court, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”
2.This is not a case of error apparent on the fact of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ record inviting a review of the order. The above finding has been
1/2
CMP(MD) No.1141 of 2020
given only on account of the circumstances which has been narrated in very clear detail from paragraph no.15 onwards.
3.In order to review the Judgment or an order, the petitioner should make out a case of there being some error which is apparent on the face of the record by which the petitioner is aggrieved. Such a ground has not been made out in the present review. The sentence which the learned counsel has referred to is purely in the lines of an administrative direction to the learned Sub-Judge, over which the parties to the proceedings cannot have any grievances.
4.In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed.
sd/-
12/02/2020 / TRUE COPY /
/ /2020
Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO
THE PRINCIPAL SUBORDINATE JUDGE, DINDIGUL.
ORDER
IN
CMP(MD) No.1141 of 2020 AND Rev.Aplc(MD)SR.No.2676 of 2020 Date :12/02/2020 MS/VR/SAR-3/25.02.2020/2P.2C
2/2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the review petition succeeds in establishing an error apparent on the face of the record regarding an administrative direction.
Whether an administrative direction to a Principal Sub-Judge to hold an enquiry is a ground for review.
S. Krishna Rajan
1 Alagu Lakshmi
2 Durai Pandian
P.T. Asha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
