Single bench dismissed the present writ petition attempting to quash an impugned order, holding that the petitioner had already exhausted remedies in a previous writ filed in 2005 regarding the same matter.
No relief granted. Writ petition dismissed with no costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ
WP NO.28824 OF 2013 AND MP NO.2 OF 2013 S.Viswanathan ...Petitioner Vs.
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Chief Secretary Revenue Department Fort St. George, Chennai - 9. 2.The District Collector Erode District Erode. 3.The President Kumaravalasu Panchayat South Vellode Village, Perundurai Taluk, Erode District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the 2nd respondent, bearing reference number Roc.74924/2004 O1 dated 08.11.2004 and quash the same as illegal, incompetent, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction and further direct the respondents to prevent the use of S.No.1227, South Vellode Village, Erode District, as a burial or cremation ground.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Raghavachari For Respondents : Mr.M.Rajendiran 1 and 2 Additional Government Pleader For Respondent 3 : Mr.K.Karthikeyan
O R D E R
The petitioner has preferred the above writ petition seeking to quash the impugned order passed by the second
respondent in Reference Number Roc.74924/2004 O1 dated 08.11.2004.
From the records presented before this Court, it is noted that the very same order was challenged by the very same petitioner in W.P.No.2178 of 2005, which was disposed of on 08.02.2013, granting the request of the petitioner to pursue the matter before the Government by way of proper representation and thereafter to pursue the remedy. The petitioner has made a representation on 08.05.2013 to the Government. But, for the reasons best known, he has once again challenged the very same impugned order by way of this writ petition. The writ petition on a concluded matter, re-agitation of the very same issue, before this Court is not sustainable and the writ petition is dismissed accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-VII)
//True Copy//
TK
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
+1cc to Mr.V.Raghavachari, Advocate SR.No.16212 +1cc to Mr.V.Raghavachari, Advocate SR.No.16012
WP NO.28824 OF 2013
GMR(CO)
GN(30/03/2022)
S. Viswanathan
The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Chief Secretary Revenue Department
The District Collector Erode District
The President Kumaravalasu Panchayat South Vellode Village
M. Govindaraj
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court