Dismissed

Chinnaguttappa v. The Principal Secretary to the

Madras HC6 Sept 2021WP/33768/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-paragraph order dismissed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to relocate a memorial statue. The Court refrained from interference, noting the matter pertains to local administration without significant public interest, and declined the petitioner's request for adjournment.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of without any order; no order as to costs.

Chinnaguttappa Vs The Principal… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 06.09.2021

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU

W.P.No.33768 of 2019

Chinnaguttappa

...Petitioner

1 The Principal Secretary to

¶12

the Government of Tamil Nadu,

¶13

Department of Municipal Administration and Water Supply, Fort St. George, Chennai.

¶14

2 The Municipal Administrative Commissioner, Chepauk, Chennai-5.

¶15

3 The District Collector, Krishnagiri District.

¶16

4 The Commissioner, Corporation of Hosur, Krishnagiri District.

¶17

...Respondents

¶18

Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pass final orders for shifting of the Late Appavu Pillai's memorial statue to the new Hosur Municipality Building in HosurBagalur Road at Hosur (Hosur New Corporation Building).

¶19

For the Petitioner : Mr.U.Chandramohan

¶20

For the Respondents

¶21

: Mr.P.Muthukumar State Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3

¶22

: Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan for 4^th respondent

¶23

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

¶24

ORDER

¶25

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶26

The petitioner has been obtaining adjournment of this matter on the ground of indisposition of counsel and the like since or about February, 2021. A further adjournment is sought. The prayer for adjournment is declined.

¶27

The matter pertains to the setting up of a particular

¶28

statue or the re-location thereof.

¶29

In matters of such kind, there is hardly any element of

¶30

public interest and, in any event, this court is not minded to interfere with such matters which ought to be decided at the level of the local administration.

¶31

W.P.No.33768 of 2019 is disposed of without any order.

¶32

There will be no order as to costs.

¶33

s/dAssistant Registrar(CS IV)

¶34

True Copy

¶35

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶36

sasi To: 1 The Principal Secretary to

¶37

the Government of Tamil Nadu,

¶38

Department of Municipal Administration and Water Supply Fort St. George, Chennai.

¶39

2 The Municipal Administrative Commissioner, Chepauk, Chennai-5.

¶40

3 The District Collector,

¶41

Krishnagiri District.

¶42

4 The Commissioner, Corporation of Hosur,

¶43

Krishnagiri District.

¶44

+1 CC to The Government Pleader sr 44910.

¶45

+1 CC to Mr.P.Jagadeesan, Advocate sr 44967.

W.P.No.33768 of 2019

PA(CO)

SP(14/09/2021)

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

Chinnaguttappa v. The Principal Secretary to the

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinnaguttappa v. The Principal Secretary to the

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 Sumathinath Bhagwan Vs The Commissioner

K.Vinayagam Vs The District Collector

Tirumalaa Daairy Limited Vs Tirmala Milk Products Private Limited

P.Subramanian, Vs The Registrar General

A.Mydeen Bi Vs The Branch Manager

The Authorized Officer Vs The Honourable Chief Judicial Magistrate