Disposed

P.Chinnasamy v. The Inspector General of Registration

Madras HC8 Nov 2021WP/20310/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the Madras High Court directed the second respondent to conduct an enquiry on the petitioner's representation after issuing notices to other respondents, affording them an opportunity of hearing, and passing orders on merits within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Second respondent directed to conduct enquiry after notice to parties 3-6 with option to be heard and pass orders on merits within twelve weeks.

P.Chinnasamy Vs The Inspector General of Registration — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 08.11.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶5

W.P.NO.20310 OF 2021

¶6

P. Chinnasamy ... Petitioner

¶7

-Vs-

¶8

The Inspector of General Registration,

¶9

No.100, Santhome Road,

¶10

Chennai-600 004.

¶11

The District Registrar, District Registrar Office,

¶12

Dharmapuri.

¶13

Govindasamy

¶14

Aattukaran @ Chinnasamy

¶15

Raman

¶16

R.Sundari ... Respondents

¶17

Prayer :-

¶18

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner representation dated 17.08.2021 and fix the time frame.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Selvam For R1 and R2 : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan Government Advocate.

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner representation, dated 17.08.2021 and fixed the time frame.

¶22

Heard Mr.M.Selvam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2.

¶23

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the writ petition, the second respondent is directed to conduct an enquiry on the representation submitted by the petitioner, dated 17.08.2021, after issuance of notice to the parties concerned i.e the respondents 3 to 6 herein and after giving them an opportunity of hearing and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶24

With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

Assistant Registrar(CS VI)

¶27

//True Copy//

¶28

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶29

¶30

¶31

The Inspector of General Registration,

¶32

No.100, Santhome Road,

¶33

Chennai-600 004.

¶34

The District Registrar,

¶35

District Registrar Office,

¶36

Dharmapuri.

¶37

+1cc to Mr.M.Selvam, Advocate, S.R.No.57580

¶38

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.57880

¶39

W.P.No.20310 of 2021

¶40

SS(CO) PM/24/11/2021

P.Chinnasamy v. The Inspector General of Registration

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Chinnasamy v. The Inspector General of Registration

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

V. Manimaran Vs the Madras Journalists

J.Elumalai Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

M.Sadasivan Vs The District Revenue Officer

Tripower Enterprises (Pvt) Ltd., Vs The Sub Registrar

M.S.Sivakumar Vs The Joint Sub Registrar No. 1

Mrs.v.Sindhuja Vs The Sub Registrar