Dismissed

S.PanduRangan v. The Secretary

Madras HC15 Sept 2021WP/19481/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed the writ petition filed to direct the Commissioner of Police to consider the petitioner's representation alleging threats by a specific police inspector. The dismissal was accompanied by a direction prohibiting the 5th respondent from using coercive measures or police clout against the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed with a specific direction that the 5th respondent shall not resort to coercive measures or use clout against the petitioner.

S.PanduRangan Vs The Secretary — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 15.09.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶5

W.P.No.19481 of 2021

¶6

(Through Video Conferencing)

¶7

S.PanduRangan ...Petitioner

¶8

¶9

1.The Secretary, Department of Home,

¶10

Government Of Tamil Nadu,

¶11

Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶12

The Director of General of Police, Kamarjar Salai, Chennai – 600 004.

¶13

The Commissioner of Police, Chennai City, Veppery,

¶14

Chennai – 600 007.

¶15

The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Neelangarai Range, Chinna Neelangarai

¶16

Chennai – 600 115.

¶17

Sarvavana Prabhu Now working as Inspector of Police Prohibition and Enforcement Wing Madhavaram, Chennai, ...Respondents

¶18

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 4 herein more particularly the 3^rd respondent herein Viz the Commissioner of Police, Chennai City, Veppery, Chennai – 600 007 to consider the representation of the petitioner herein dated 25.08.2021 forthwith.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr..T.V.G.Kartheeban

¶20

For Respondents: Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal R1 to R4 Government Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.Ramsanakar R5

¶21

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

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The petitioner has already filed a Civil Suit against the 5^th respondent. After filing the suit, the petitioner has sent a representation to the respondents herein stating that the 5^th respondent is using his power as an official with the police Department and threatening the petitioner with henchmen. The learned counsel for the 5^th respondent herein submits that the representation is bogus and the 5^th respondent is being targeted unnecessarily, even though the suit has been already been filed in O.S.No.278 of 2021.

¶24

2.The learned counsel for the official respondents 1 to 4 submits that after the suit was filed, the whereabout of the petitioner is not know and that the petitioner appears to have sold the property to an advocate who answered the phone call and had refused to co-operate with the respondents. Considering the fact, that the petitioner has already filed a suit in O.S.No.278 of 21 before the District Munsif Court, Alandur, therefore there is no merits in the present writ petition to direct respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner. All the same, while dismissing this writ petition, the 5^th respondent against whom the petitioner has filed O.S.No.278 of 2021 before the District Munsif Court at Alandur shall not resort to any coercive measures or use his clout as an Inspector of Police against the petitioner.

¶25

3.This Writ petition is dismissed with the above observations. No costs.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar (CJ Conf)

¶28

//True Copy//

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶30

jas

¶31

¶32

1.The Secretary,

¶33

Department of Home,

¶34

Government Of Tamil Nadu,

¶35

Fort St.George,

¶36

Chennai – 600 009.

¶37

The Director of General of Police, Kamarjar Salai,

¶38

Chennai – 600 004.

¶39

The Commissioner of Police, Chennai City, Veppery,

¶40

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Chennai – 600 007.

¶41

The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Neelangarai Range, Chinna Neelangarai Chennai – 600 115.

¶42

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.45574

¶43

W.P.No.19481 of 2021

¶44

BR(CO) GN(02/11/2021)

¶45

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

S.PanduRangan v. The Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.PanduRangan v. The Secretary

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

S.Susheela Vs The Director of Elementary Education

M.Kalpana Mahalingam Vs The Secretary

G.Murugan, (Mhr 607) Vs The Managing Director

S.Baskar Vs The Government of TamilNadu

N.R.Manoharan Vs The Managing Director

S.Gopal Vs The Chairman Cum Managing Director