Dismissed

Sathiyadoss H.T v. the Director General of Police

Madras HC6 Jul 2023WP(MD)/350/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner challenged the transfer of a senior police officer, asserting apprehension of abuse of power and a personal enmity. The court held that preventive relief against one person cannot be granted in a writ of mandamus and dismissed the petition due to lack of merits.

What did the court decide?

No preventive relief was granted; the petition seeking a stay on the transfer of the opposite party was dismissed.

Sathiyadoss H.T Vs the Director General of Police — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.350 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 06.07.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

W.P(MD)No.350 of 2019

Sathiyadoss H.T

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The Director General of Police, Law and Order, Mylapore, Chennai.

¶11

2.The Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai.

¶12

3.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Nellai Circle, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District.

¶13

4.The Superintendent of Police, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

¶14

5.N.Bhaskaran,

¶15

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

1/4

¶18

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

¶19

W.P(MD)No.350 of 2019

¶20

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to consider the petitioner's representation, dated 06.12.2018.

¶21

For Petitioner : M/s.S.Sulega for Mr.K.Prabhu For Respondents : Mr.J.John Rajadurai Government Advocate (for R1 to R4) No Appearance (for R5)

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This Writ Petition is filed with a prayer to issue a Writ of Mandamus to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 16.12.2018.

¶24

2.Ms.S.Sulega, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend

¶25

that the petitioner had given all details of the abuse of power by the fifth respondent in the representation and the petitioner was put to grave prejudice on account of the action of the fifth respondent. When the petitioner's apprehension was genuine, the respondents 1 to 4 had a statutory duty to consider the representation.

¶26

2/4

¶27

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

¶28

W.P(MD)No.350 of 2019

¶29

3.In the said representation, the petitioner is praying that the particular person, namely, the fifth respondent should not be transferred as Deputy Superintendent of Police to Kanniyakumari stating that he has a previous enmity with him and that he will utilise his official position so as to settle the issue with him. Firstly, in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents it is averred that the said petition is also considered and after enquiry they found no case to grant the relief and have closed the said petition. Secondly, such a prayer cannot be maintained and if at all, the said person had acted with any mala fide manner, the petitioner has only to complain about such an exercise of power and such preventive relief cannot be granted in reference to one person in a writ of mandamus in exercise of under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, finding no merits, this Writ Petition is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶30

06.07.2023

¶31

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No sji

¶32

3/4

¶33

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

¶34

W.P(MD)No.350 of 2019

¶35

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J.

¶36

sji

¶37

¶38

1.The Director General of Police, Law and Order, Mylapore, Chennai.

¶39

2.The Inspector General of Police, South Zone, Madurai.

¶40

3.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Nellai Circle, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli District.

¶41

4.The Superintendent of Police, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

¶42

ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.350 of 2019

¶43

DATED : 06.07.2023

¶44

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

¶45

4/4

Sathiyadoss H.T v. the Director General of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sathiyadoss H.T v. the Director General of Police

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

Dr.M.N. Karthi Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Dr.v.Jeyakodish, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Dr.R.Sudha Md, Vs the Principal Secretary

M.Santhosh, Vs the Chairman and Managing

V.Rajendran Vs the Superintending Engineer

R.Nalini, Vs the Director of School