Single-judge Writ Petition under Article 226 challenging inaction by the Rural Development Department and Panchayat officials. The court found that representations by the petitioner were considered, allegations were refuted, and a communication closing the matter was already sent in 2015.
The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to 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.
Writ Petition No.13622 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.11.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN
Writ Petition No.13622 of 2015
E.Murugan ..Petitioner
vs.
1.The Director, Rural Development Department, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015
2.The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai.
3.The Assistant Director(Panchayat), Cheyyar Region, Cheyyar -604 407. Thiruvannamalai District.
4.N.Sekar, Block Development Officer, West Arani, Thiruvannamalai District.
5.G.Devaraj, Panchayat Assistant, Kattukanallathur Panchayat,
1/5
Writ Petition No.13622 of 2023
Arani Taluk,
Thiruvannamalai District. ... Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent herein to consider the petitioner's representations dated 04.11.2013 & 17.11.2014 and to initiate necessary action against the 4 th & 5 th respondents herein within the time frame as fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Vijayan
For Respondents : Mr.R.U.Dinesh Raj Kumar, AGP for R1 to R3
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent herein to consider the petitioner's representations dated 04.11.2013 & 17.11.2014 and to initiate necessary action against the respondents 4 & 5 herein within the time frame as fixed by this Court.
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner present and submitted that the
representations of the petitioner dated 04.11.2013 & 17.11.2014 have not
2/5
Writ Petition No.13622 of 2023
been considered so far.
3.The learned Additional Government Pleader representing the respondents 1 to 3 is present and filed counter. There is no representation on behalf of the respondents 4 and 5.
4.It is submitted by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 that representations of the petitioner dated 04.11.2013 & 17.11.2014 were considered and found that there is no truth in the allegations levelled against the petitioner against the respondents 4 & 5 and accordingly, after due enquiry, the said representations were closed and a communication was also sent to the petitioner on 09.03.2015 vide R.C.No.4261/A1/2014, thereby, nothing survives for adjudication in this Writ Petition.
5.In view of the submission made by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and also on going through the counter affidavit, it is seen that the representations of the petitioner dated 04.11.2013 & 17.11.2014 have already been considered
3/5
Writ Petition No.13622 of 2023
and found that the allegations levelled against the petitioner against the respondents 4 & 5 are incorrect. Accordingly, a communication was also sent to the petitioner on 09.03.2015 vide R.C.No.4261/A1/2014. Since, a communication has already been sent to the petitioner, nothing survives for adjudication in this Writ Petition.
20.11.2023
Index : Yes/No Speaking order:Yes/No dn To 1.The Director, Rural Development Department, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015 2.The District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai. 3.The Assistant Director(Panchayat), Cheyyar Region, Cheyyar -604 407. Thiruvannamalai District.
4/5
Writ Petition No.13622 of 2023
Dr.D. NAGARJUN, J
dn
Writ Petition No.13622 of 2015
20.11.2023
5/5
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's representations regarding allegations against respondents 4 and 5 were considered and disposed of prior to filing this writ petition.
Whether any adjudication is required in view of the closure communication sent to the petitioner.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
E. Murugan
Director, Rural Development Department
District Collector, Thiruvannamalai District
Assistant Director(Panchayat), Cheyyar Region
N. Sekar
G. Devaraj
D. Nagarjun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
