Disposed

R.S.Mohanraj v. Union of India

Madras HC13 Jun 2022WP/11155/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judge disposed of a writ petition seeking mandatory display of national leaders' photos in local bodies. The court declined to express an opinion on merits, noting the matter required a Division Bench, but granted liberty to file a fresh petition restricted to the petitioner's village.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file a fresh Writ Petition restricting the cause of action and prayer only to the petitioner's village, Anikadavu Village.

R.S.Mohanraj Vs Union of India — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 13.06.2022

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶5

W.P.NO.11155 OF 2022

¶6

R.S.Mohanraj Bharathiya Janatha Party 7/183, Ramachandrapuram, Anikadavu Village – 642 120, Tiruppur District.

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Union of India rep. by its Home Secretary, New Delhi. 2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St.George, Chennai. 3. The District Collector, Tiruppur District, Tiruppur. 4. The Superintendent of Police, Tiruppur District, Tiruppur. Prayer :

¶10

... Respondents

¶11

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 10.01.2022 for keeping the Photos of Hon'ble President and Hon'ble Prime Minister in all Local Bodies such as Panchayat Union Office, Block Development Office, Cooperative Society Bank and Ration Shops etc., within the time that may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ayyaswamy

¶13

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

¶14

For Respondents: Mr.B.Vijay, [R2 & R3]

¶15

Additional Government Pleader Mr.R.Murthi, [R4]

¶16

Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking for a Mandamus to consider his representation dated 10.01.2022, requesting the respondents to keep the photographs of the Hon'ble President and Hon'ble Prime Minister in all local bodies such as Panchayat Union Office, Block Development Office, Cooperative Society Bank and Ration Shops etc., within the time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶19

The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the second and third respondents opposes the entertainment of this Writ Petition on the ground that the petitioner is an interloper and has no locus standi to file this Writ Petition. He would also submit that the Government Order which is relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner, was earlier considered by a Division Bench of this Court on 07.04.2021.

¶20

In the order dated 07.04.2021 passed by the Division Bench of this Court, G.O. (Standing) No.457, Public (General-1) Department, dated 04.06.2006, which is relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner, was considered. In the said decision, the Division Bench held that the option to keep photographs of national leaders mentioned in the said G.O., is not mandatory. Since the relevant Government notification referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner, does not make it mandatory for all Government buildings to carry the photographs of the persons indicated therein, it was held that it will be for the individual Government Offices to deal with the matter in accordance with law.

¶21

The petitioner is a resident of Anikadavu Village, Tiruppur District. However, the relief sought for in this Writ Petition, is in the nature of a public interest litigation. The petitioner seeks for an omnibus direction from this Court in respect of the entire State. Such a prayer, if at all can be granted, only by a Division Bench is a public interest litigation.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner would now submit that if liberty is granted by this Court, the petitioner will file a fresh Writ Petition, restricting his rights only to the village where he is residing namely Anikadavu Village. The said submission is recorded.

¶23

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

¶24

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the

¶25

matter, this Writ Petition is disposed of, by granting liberty if so advised, to file a fresh Writ Petition for the same cause of action, restricting the petitioner's right only to Anikadavu Village. No costs.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)

¶28

//True Copy//

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶30

Sni

¶31

¶32

The Home Secretary, Union of India,

¶33

New Delhi.

¶34

The Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu,

¶35

Fort St.George, Chennai.

¶36

The District Collector, Tiruppur District, Tiruppur.

¶37

The Superintendent of Police, Tiruppur District, Tiruppur.

¶38

+1cc to Mr.P.Ayyaswamy, Advocate, S.R.No.35165 +1cc to Mr.A.Arunkumar, Advocate, S.R.No.35166 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.35367

¶39

W.P.No.11155 of 2022

¶40

SKM(CO) PM/23/06/2022 PM/28/06/2022

¶41

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

R.S.Mohanraj v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.S.Mohanraj v. Union of India

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

T.P.Mohan Vs Dr.v.P.Jeyaseelan,I.a.S

C.Adhimoolam Vs The Superintending Engineer

K.Ramesh Babu Vs The Superintending Engineer

Rajesh Kanna Murugaiyan Vs The Union of India

M.Muniappan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

M.Manodhambal Vs The District Collector