Dismissed

A.Rajasekar v. The Commissioner

Madras HC5 Mar 2021WP/34252/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged an election result under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner complained that a deceased candidate's name was declared winner due to data discrepancy. The High Court directed the Commissioner to dispose of the petitioner's pending representation within four weeks and dismissed the petition as the substantive remedy lay in an appeal. No costs were

What did the court decide?

The first respondent is directed to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 26.11.2018 within four weeks. No costs.

A.Rajasekar Vs The Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 05.03.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶5

W.P. No.34252 of 2018

¶6

A.Rajasekar, S/o.Arumugam ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs 1. The Commissioner, Tamilnadu State Co-operative Societies Election Commission, Kamadenu Super Market, 1^st Floor, Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai – 18.

¶8

The District Election Officer/General Manager, District Industries Centre, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District – 635 301.

¶9

The Election Officer, IND No.1/KGI Krishnagiri District Printers Service Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd., No.32, Old Head Post Office Building, K' Theatre Road, Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District – 635 301. ... Respondents

¶10

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 26.11.2018.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Sundaravadanam For R1 : Mr.M.S.Palaniswamy Standing Counsel For R2 : Mr.R.Balaramesh Special Government Pleader

¶12

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1^st

¶13

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

¶14

respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 26.11.2018.

¶15

The grievance of the petitioner is that on the date when the election results were announced the qualified candidate Manjula had secured 31 votes but had died and therefore Gomathi who secured 28 votes was declared as a winner.

¶16

The learned counsel for the 1^st and 2^nd respondents submits that an appeal lies against the order declaring the results under Section 90 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 and therefore it is for the petitioner to raise an election dispute before the Appellate Authority.

¶17

I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

¶18

Without expressing any opinion on the correctness or otherwise in the manner in which the election results were declared by the 3^rd respondent, I dispose this writ petition, since representation dated 26.11.2018 of the petitioner is pending before the 1^st respondent, the 1^st respondent is therefore directed to dispose the same within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order.

¶19

This Writ Petition is disposed of with the above observations. No costs.

¶20

Assistant Registrar(CS VI)

¶21

//True Copy//

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

arb

¶24

¶25

The Commissioner,

¶26

Tamilnadu State Co-operative Societies Election Commission, Kamadenu Super Market, 1^st Floor, Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai – 18.

¶27

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

¶28

The District Election Officer/General Manager, District Industries Centre, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District – 635 301.

¶29

The Election Officer,
IND No.1/KGI Krishnagiri District Printers
Service Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd.,
No.32, Old Head Post Office Building,
K' Theatre Road,
Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District – 635 301.
+1cc to M/s.T.Sundaravadanam, Advocate Sr.14499
+1cc to M/s.M.S.Palaniswamy, Advocate Sr.14754
+1cc to M/s.R.Balaramesh, Advocate Sr.14037
W.P. No. 34252 of 2018
pl[co]
srg 26/03/2021

¶30

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

A.Rajasekar v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Rajasekar v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s.Adyar Gate Hotal Ltd. Vs The Assistant Commissioner

M/S. United Spirits Ltd., Vs the Deputy Commissioner(Ct)-I

K.Jagadeesan Vs The Commissioner

Munusamy Vs S.Abeeth Hussain

Ponnusamy Vs The Executive Engineer

A.v.Lakshmanan, Vs The District Registrar of