Dismissed

K.Eswaran, v. the District Collector

Madras HC1 Mar 2021WP/17341/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking quashing of show-cause proceedings against the petitioner, a panchayat president. The court held the petition became infructuous due to efflux of time but granted liberty to participate in the underlying proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Disposal of Writ Petition and closure of connected Miscellaneous Petitions with liberty to participate in underlying proceedings.

K.Eswaran, Vs the District Collector — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 01.03.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

W.P.NO.17341 OF 2011

AND

M.P.NO.1 OF 2011

K.Eswaran ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The District Collector,
Inspector of Panchayat,
Coimbatore District.
2. The Tasildhar,
Pollachi Taluk (North),
Coimbatore District. ... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call
for the records in Na.Ka.No.800/2010/A3 dated 10.07.2011 and
quash the same.
For Petitioner : No appearance
For Respondents : Mr.N.Inbanathan
Additional Government Pleader
O R D E R

¶9

The petitioner was appointed as the president of the panchayat under the banner of the opposition. It is his contention that though he was discharging his duty properly, the first respondent has issued the impugned notice dated 10.7.2011 under reference No.Na.Ka.No.300/2010/A3 to show cause as to why he should not be removed from the post. It is submitted that the impugned proceedings smacks of bias and has been issued at the behest of the ruling party and therefore the impugned notice was liable to be quashed.

¶10

2.Though no counter has been filed till date, it is to be noted that the writ petition itself has become infructous due

¶11

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

¶12

to efflux of time. In any event, the impugned proceedings is merely a show cause proceeding which calls upon the petitioner to show cause as to why he should not be removed from the post of the President of the panchayat.

¶13

3.Therefore, there is no merit in the challenge to the same. Petitioner is however given liberty to participate in the impugned proceeding by filing a suitable reply within a period of 30 days from date of receipt of this order if anything survives for adjudication in the impugned proceedings. If such a reply is filed by the petitioner within such time, the respondent shall proceed to consider the same and bring a closure to the proceedings by passing appropriate orders on merits in accordance with law.

¶14

4.Writ Petition is disposed with the above observation.
No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are
closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
jas
To
1. The District Collector,
Inspector of Panchayat,
Coimbatore District.
2. The Tasildhar,
Pollachi Taluk (North),
Coimbatore District.
+1cc to Mr.K.P.Gopala Krishnan, Advocate, S.R.No.13116
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.12809
W.P.No.17341 of 2011
and
M.P.No.1 of 2011
PMK(CO)
CS/30/03/2021

¶15

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

K.Eswaran, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Eswaran, 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.S.P. Subramanian Vs Deputy Commissioner of Customs

The New India Assurance Co., Ltd., Tiruppur Vs Chenniappan

T.R.K.Saravanan, Vs the Commissioner

P.Chinnasamy Vs The Managing Director

M/s. Vijay Television Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner (St)

Mehul Doshi Vs the Member Secretary