Disposed

V.Janakiraman v. The Secretary to Government

Madras HC17 Mar 2022WP/6092/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition concerning a housing building advance refund, the High Court directed the first respondent to consider a pending representation regarding an installment payment plan or alternative property purchase within twelve weeks, while keeping the refund order in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation regarding installment repayment or alternative purchase within twelve weeks and keep the refund order in abeyance.

V.Janakiraman Vs The Secretary to Government — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 17.03.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

W.P.No.6092 of 2022

¶6

and W.M.P.Nos.6180 & 6181 of 2022

V.Janakiraman

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St.Geroge, Chennai – 09.

¶11

2.The Secretary to Government, Welfare of Differently Abled Persons Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 09.

¶12

3.The Commissioner, Welfare of Differently Abled Persons, No.5, Wellington College Campus, Chennai – 05. 4.The Commissioner, School Education, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 06.

¶13

5.The District Collector, Chengalpet District, Chengalpet – 01. ...Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the 5^th respondent in connection with the impugned order passed by him in Na.Ka.No.1548/2020/R3 dated 30.11.2021 and quash the same and

¶15

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

¶16

further direct the respondents 1 & 5 to extend the time limit for purchasing the plot/flat.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sivakumar for Mr. Ali Hassan Khan For Respondents : Mrs.S.Anitha Special Government Pleader

¶18

ORDER

¶19

By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶20

According to the writ petitioner, the petitioner applied for a House Building advance for the plot-cumconstruction of the building. Accordingly, the 3^rd respondent had sanctioned a sum of Rs.21,00,000/- towards Housing Building advance, out of which the petitioner had received a sum of Rs.15,75,000/-. Thereafter, the construction materials purchased by the petitioner to build the house were destroyed due to "Vardha Cyclone", and therefore, the petitioner was not in a position to complete the construction of the building in the said property. Hence, the petitioner made a request to sell the above plot and purchase a new plot or ready to occupy the same. The respondents have considered the said request and granted extension of six months time. Thereafter, due to the Covid-19 Pandemic situation, the petitioner cannot able to complete the said process of purchasing the new property. In the meantime, the 5th respondent has passed an impugned order dated 30.11.2021, directing the petitioner to refund the entire amount along with interest. Aggrieved over the impugned order, the petitioner made a representation to the respondents 2 and 3 on 24.01.2022 and the same was forwarded to the 5th respondent for consideration. But, so far, no order has been passed. Hence, the writ petition.

¶21

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the aforesaid impugned order has been passed without giving any opportunity to the petitioner. Subsequent to the aforesaid impugned order, the petitioner made a representation dated 03.12.2021, to the 1st respondent seeking to repay the amount of Rs.6,02,583/- in 60 equated monthly instalments or to make alternative purchase of the property within a period of 10 days and the same is pending and hence, he seeks to pass an appropriate direction.

¶22

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

¶23

The learned Special Government Pleader would submit that since the petitioner has not complied the earlier order passed by the 5th respondent, the aforesaid impugned order dated 30.11.2021 has been passed by the 5th respondent. However, if any such representation was received by the 1st respondent, the same will be considered on merits and in accordance with law.

¶24

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the limited scope of prayer, without expressing any opinion on merits, this court is inclined to direct the 1^st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 03.12.2021 and pass appropriate orders on its own merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, the aforesaid impugned order shall be kept in abeyance.

¶25

With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

s/d-

Assistant Registrar

True Copy

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶30

ata/uma

¶31

¶32

1.The Secretary,

¶33

Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St.Geroge,

¶34

Chennai – 09.

¶35

2.The Secretary,

¶36

Welfare of Differently abled persons Department, Fort St.George,

¶37

Chennai – 09.

¶38

3.The Commissioner,

¶39

Welfare of Differently abled persons,

¶40

No.5, Wellington College Campus,

¶41

Chennai – 05.

¶42

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

¶43

4.The Commissioner, School Education, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 06.

¶44

5.The District Collector, Chengalpet District, Chengalpet – 01.

¶45

+1 CC to Mr. Ali Hassan Khan, Advocate sr 18318.

¶46

W.P.No.6092 of 2022 and W.M.P Nos.6180 & 6181 of 2022

¶47

SSD(CO) SP(05/04/2022)

¶48

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

V.Janakiraman v. The Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Janakiraman v. The Secretary to Government

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

K.Pandiyan Vs The Director of Elementary Education

Dr.Valampuri Selvam Vs The Director of Public Health and

A.Thandavan Vs The Government of TamilNadu

N.Saravanane Vs The Director

A.Manjunath Vs Union of India

K.Raja Vs State of Tamil nadu