Dismissed

P.Narayanan, v. District Collector

Madras HC22 Jun 2023WP/17933/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the Regional Director of Municipal Administration to conduct an enquiry on a complaint related to a 2016 election for the post of Vice Chairman of the Municipality. The court held that nothing survived for further adjudication and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition and connected miscellaneous petition were dismissed with no order as to costs.

P.Narayanan, Vs District Collector — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.17933 of 2016

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 22.06.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI

¶6

W.P.No. 17933 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.15627 of 2016

¶7

P.Narayanan

¶8

Municipal Commissioner, Grade-II Palladam Municipality, Palladam Tiruppur District.

¶9

... Petitioner

¶10

Versus

¶11

1.District Collector, Tiruppur District, Tiruppur.

¶12

2.The Director of Municipal Administration, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

¶13

3.The Regional Director of Municipal Administration, Tiruppur Region, Tiruppur.

¶14

4.M.Easen

¶15

5.P.K.Palanichamy, Vice Chairman Palladam Municipality, Palladam ... Respondents

¶16

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, prays to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3^rd respondent to conduct an enquiry on the petition dated 06.04.2016 submitted by the 4^th respondent by giving opportunity to the petitioner.

¶17

1/4

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

W.P.No.17933 of 2016

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Gnanasekar For Respondents 1to3 : Mr.M.Shahjahan Special Government Pleader For Respondent 4 : Mr.P.Nethaji for Respondent 5 : Mr.R.Veeramani

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

This writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the 3^rd respondent to conduct an enquiry on the petition dated 06.04.2016 submitted by the 4^th respondent, by giving an opportunity to the petitioner.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner states that he does not have instructions with regard to the current status of the matter. However, it is seen that the writ petition has been filed for a limited relief of mandamus to direct the 3^rd respondent to conduct an enquiry on the representation submitted by the 4^th respondent in the year 2016. The matter pertains to election to the post of Vice Chairman of the Municipality. According to the 2/4

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

W.P.No.17933 of 2016

¶26

petitioner, the complaint of the 4^th respondent dated 06.04.2016 is not bona fide and it is one borne out of mala fides. The complaint itself was pertaining to an election that was proposed to be held in the year 2016.

¶27

Considering the above, nothing survives for further adjudication. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.

22.06.2023

Index: Yes/ No nr

1.District Collector, Tiruppur District, Tiruppur.

¶32

2.The Director of Municipal Administration, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

¶33

3.The Regional Director of Municipal Administration, Tiruppur Region, Tiruppur.

¶34

3/4

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.17933 of 2016

P.B.BALAJI, J.,

W.P.No. 17933 of 2016

¶40

and W.M.P.No.15627 of 2016

¶41

22.06.2023

¶42

4/4

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

P.Narayanan, v. District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Narayanan, v. District Collector

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

Mrs.v.Vennila, Vs The Director

S.Varadharajan, Vs Airports Authority of India

S.Shanthasundari Vs The Chief Educational Officer

M.J.Ramavathy Vs The Chief Educational Officer

Mrs.Janaki @ Nancy Janaki Vs The Director of Elementary

C.Rajendran Vs The Chief Engineer