Allowed

R.Pachiammal v. the Block Development Officer

Madras HC21 Dec 2020WP/34955/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging a recovery order passed without prior notice and opportunity of hearing. The High Court set aside the order, directing the respondent to issue notice and hear the petitioner before passing such an order.

What did the court decide?

The recovery order passed in Na.Ka.No.4142-2007-A6 is set aside. The respondent is directed to give notice and hearing before passing a fresh order.

R.Pachiammal Vs the Block Development Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 21.12.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶5

W.P.No.34955 of 2007 and M.P.No.1 of 2007

¶6

R.Pachiammal ...Petitioner

¶7

.Vs.

¶8

The Block Development Officer (Block Panchayat) Nallampalli Panchayat Union, Nallampalli, Dharmapuri District. ...Respondent

¶9

PRAYER : Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the respondent in Na.Ka.No.4142-2007-A6 dated .10.2007 and quash the same insofar as the petitioner is concerned.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Mohan Raj For Respondent : Mr.K.Magesh Special Government Pleader ORDER (The case has been heard through Video Conferencing)

¶11

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order of the respondent in Na.Ka.No.4142-2007-A6 passed in October, 2007 and quash the same insofar as the petitioner is concerned.

¶12

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that without giving any prior notice to the petitioner, the respondent passed an order of recovery, which warrant interference.

¶13

Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent has accepted the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no prior notice was issued to

¶14

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

¶15

the petitioner before passing the order of recovery.

¶16

Considering the above submission made by the learned counsel on either side, since the recovery order was passed without giving any notice and without giving any opportunity to the petitioner to give his explanation, the recovery order passed by the respondent in Na.Ka.No.4142-2007-A6 is set aside. The respondent is directed to give notice to the petitioner before passing an order of recovery and after getting explanation from the petitioner, pass order in accordance with law.

¶17

With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands
disposed of. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS III)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
The Block Development Officer
(Block Panchayat)
Nallampalli Panchayat Union,
Nallampalli, Dharmapuri District.
+1cc to Mr.K.Magesh, Advocate, S.R.No.42428
W.P.No.34955 of 2007
ln (co)
rr ii (05/02/2021)

¶18

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

R.Pachiammal v. the Block Development Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Pachiammal v. the Block Development 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

K.Subbiah Vs the Inspector General of

M Ranganathan Vs D. Kannabiran

D.Shankar Vs the Garrison Engineer(Dssc)

P.Vellaisamy Vs the Director of School Education

A.Tamilselvi Vs S.Kannappan

A.Munira Begum Vs S.Kannappan