Disposed

Minor.Susmitha v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC13 Dec 2023WP/21193/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sleek order where the High Court refused to quash a Revenue Divisional Officer's notice in a writ petition because a civil suit concerning the matter had already been filed in the District Munsif Court. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction that the lower officer not insist on appearance.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to the Revenue Divisional Officer not to insist on appearance of parties.

Minor.Susmitha Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P. No.21193 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED :13.12.2023

¶4

Coram:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶6

W.P. No.21193 of 2019 and W.M.P No.20402 of 2019

¶7

Minor. Susmitha Rep. by her natural guardian and mother D.Sumathi

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruppur

¶11

Abdul Qadir ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the proceedings made in Na.Ka.No.1631/2019/A1 dated 19.06.2019 issued by the 1st respondent and quash the same and forbear the 1st respondent in any manner conducting further enquiry on the basis of the complaint given by the 2nd respondent.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.Ethirajulu G

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.V.Veluchamy

¶15

Additional Government Pleader for R1 Mr.C.D.Sugumar for R2 ORDER

¶16

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

¶17

1/4

¶18

W.P. No.21193 of 2019

¶19

This Writ Petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the proceedings made in Na.Ka.No.1631/2019/A1 dated 19.06.2019 issued by the 1st respondent and

¶20

quash the same and forbear the 1st respondent in any manner conducting further enquiry further on the basis of the complaint given by the 2nd respondent.

¶21

It is seen that the writ petition is filed challenging the notice dated 19.06.2019, issued by the 1st respondent in which, the petitioner and the 2nd respondents were asked to appear before him on 09.07.2019 at 3.00 p.m. It is the contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that already the petitioner appeared before the 1st respondent on 09.07.2019 and without hearing the petitioner and without passing any order, the petitioner was asked to appear on some other day.

¶22

It is made clear that before appearing before the 1st respondent, the petitioner should have challenged the said notice and once the petitioner appeared on 09.07.2019, she cannot challenge the said notice.

¶23

2/4

¶24

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

¶25

W.P. No.21193 of 2019

¶26

Since it is stated by the petitioner that already the petitioner has filed a suit in O.S.No.196 of 2019, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Tiruppur, the parties are at liberty to work out their remedy before the Civil Court.

¶27

Since already the Civil Court has seized up the matter, the 1st respondent shall not insist the parties to appear before him for enquiry.

¶28

With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶29

13.12.2023

¶30

ksa-2 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No

¶31

To The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruppur

¶32

3/4

¶33

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

¶34

W.P. No.21193 of 2019

¶35

P.VELMURUGAN. J.

¶36

Ksa-2

¶37

W.P. No.21193 of 2019

¶38

13.12.2023

¶39

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

¶40

4/4

Minor.Susmitha v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Minor.Susmitha v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

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

Savita Idnani Vs The State of TamilNadu

P.Kuppammal Vs the District Collector

Savithri Vs The Revenue Tahsildar

N.Ponsingh, Vs The State

Amita Patel, Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

N.Ethiraj Vs The Principal Secretary to