Disposed

Vellaiyan Poosari v. The Commissioner

Madras HC2 Jan 2023WP(MD)/28913/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a direction to a respondent authority to decide a lower court petition within a fixed time. The Court framed a procedure for the authority to ascertain entitlement, notice deficiencies, conduct an enquiry, and pass a reasoned order, disposing the writ petition on these terms.

What did the court decide?

The complained petition was disposed by directing the authority to enquire into the claims, inform deficiencies, and pass a reasoned order within the specified period, without expressing any view on t

Vellaiyan Poosari Vs The Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P. (MD) No. 28913 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 02.01.2023

¶4

C O R A M

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU

¶6

W.P. (MD) No. 28913 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD)No. 22898 of 2022

Vellaiyan Poosari

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Commissioner,

¶11

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department (HR&CE), Nungambakkam,

¶12

Chennai.

¶13

2.The Joint Commissioner,

¶14

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department (HR&CE), Thanjavur & District.

¶15

3.The Assistant Commissioner,

¶16

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department (HR&CE), Pudukkottai & District.

¶17

4.The Thakkar / Executive Officer, Arulmighu Senbagasatha Ayyanar Thirukovil, Nambooranipatti, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶18

1/6

¶19

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

¶20

W.P. (MD) No. 28913 of 2022

5.K.V.Kannan

6.S.Raman

... Respondents

(Respondents 5 and 6 are impleaded vide order of this Court dated 02.01.2023 in WMP(MD)Nos.25 and 48 of 2023.)

¶25

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to dispose the petition in R.C.No. 674 of 2022 filed on 28.03.2022 within the stipulated time fixed by this Court.

¶26

For Petitioner : Mr. K.Baalasundharam For Respondents : Mr. P.Subbaraj (R1 to R3) Special Government Pleader Mr. G.Mathavan (R4) Mr. E.Balasubramani (R5) Mr. S.Madhavan (R6)

¶27

ORDER

¶28

Heard Mr. K.Baalasundharam, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. P.Subbaraj, Learned Special Government Pleader, for the First to Third Respondents, Mr. G.Mathavan, Learned Counsel for the Fourth Respondent Mr. E.Balasubramani, Learned Counsel for the Fifth Respondent and

¶29

2/6

¶30

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

¶31

W.P. (MD) No. 28913 of 2022

¶32

Mr. S.Madhavan, Learned Counsel for the Sixth Respondent and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties.

¶33

The Writ Petition has been filed directing the Second Respondent to dispose the petition in R.C. No. 674 of 2022 filed on 28.03.2022 by the Petitioner within the stipulated time fixed by this Court.

¶34

Having regard to the limited nature of relief sought, this Court without expressing any view on the correctness or entitlement of the claim made by the Petitioner, passes the following order:-

¶35

(i) the concerned authority shall immediately consider the petition in R.C. No. 674 of 2022 filed by the Petitioner including ascertaining as to whether the Petitioner would be entitled for the relief claimed;

¶36

(ii) if it is found that any other details or supporting documents are necessary for granting the relief claimed had not been produced, the deficiencies in that regard shall be informed in writing to the Petitioner requiring the same to be furnished within a time frame of not less than 15 clear working days for the same;

¶37

(iii) in the event of not being satisfied with the said requirements even 3/6

¶38

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

¶39

W.P. (MD) No. 28913 of 2022

¶40

thereafter, an enquiry shall be conducted affording full opportunity of personal hearing to the Petitioner to explain his position in that regard; and

¶41

(iv) a reasoned order shall be passed dealing with each of the contentions raised on merits and in accordance with law and the decision taken communicated by 28.02.2023 under written acknowledgment.

¶42

In fine, the Writ Petition is disposed on the aforesaid terms. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

¶43

02.01.2023

¶44

SM NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No

¶45

Note: Issue order copy by 25.01.2023.

¶46

¶47

1.The Commissioner,

¶48

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department (HR&CE), Nungambakkam,

¶49

Chennai.

¶50

2.The Joint Commissioner,

¶51

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department (HR&CE), Thanjavur & District.

¶52

4/6

¶53

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

¶54

W.P. (MD) No. 28913 of 2022

¶55

3.The Assistant Commissioner,

¶56

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department (HR&CE), Pudukkottai & District.

¶57

5/6

¶58

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

¶59

W.P. (MD) No. 28913 of 2022

¶60

P.D.AUDIKESAVALU,J.

¶61

¶62

W.P. (MD) No. 28913 of 2022

¶63

02.01.2023

¶64

6/6

¶65

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

Vellaiyan Poosari v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vellaiyan Poosari v. The Commissioner

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

V.Ramakrishnan Vs the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest(Hoff)

R.Ilanjiyam Vs the District Collector

M/s.Kushboo Creations Vs The Micro, Small Enterprises

Biram Baig Vs The Chairman

Sakthivel.G Vs The Commissioner

Umamaheswari Vs The Chairman