Disposed

U.Mehalashankar, v. Assistant Director

Madras HC7 Mar 2024WP/5915/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought directions to the Directorate of Enforcement to consider her representations for revocation of 2018 letters communicated to Sub Registrars. The court directed respondents to decide the representations on merits within four weeks and disposed of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to first and second respondents to consider petitioner's representations dated 23.12.2023 and 30.01.2024 and pass appropriate orders on merits within four weeks.

U.Mehalashankar, Vs Assistant Director — Money Laundering | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.5915 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 07.03.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

W.P.No.5915 of 2024

Smt.U.Mehalashankar

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Southern Regional Office, Government of India, Shastri Bhavan, III Block, III Floor, 26, Haddows Road, Chennai – 600 006.

¶12

2.The Director, Directorate of Enforcement Southern Regional Office, Government of India, Shastri Bhavan, III Block, III Floor, 26, Haddows Road, Chennai – 600 006.

¶13

3.The Sub Registrar, SRO, Pallipalayam, Pallipalayam – Sankari Rd, Pallipalayam, Tamil Nadu – 638 008.

¶14

Page 1 of 6

¶15

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

¶16

4.The Sub Registrar, SRO, Gandhipuram, 72, Saravanampatti – Kalapatti Rd, Thiruvannamail Nagar, Marvel Parambariyam, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu – 641 035.

¶17

W.P.No.5915 of 2024

¶18

... Respondents

¶19

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1 st and 2 nd respondents to dispose the representations of the petitioner dated 23.12.2023 and 30.01.2024 and communicate the same to the 3 rd and 4 th respondents within stipulated time frame as per law for the interest of justice and equity to the petitioner and the property.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Jesus Moris Ravi For Respondents : Mr.Rajinish Pathiyil Special Public Prosecutor

¶21

ORDER

¶22

(Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J. )

¶23

The petitioner herein, has given representations dated 23.12.2023

¶24

and 30.01.2024, seeking to revoke the letter dated 15.01.2018 in Reference F.No.ECIR/CEZO-II/15/2017 and the letter dated 15.01.2018

¶25

Page 2 of 6

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.No.5915 of 2024

¶28

in Reference F.No.ECIR/CEZO-II/15/2017 and to communicate the same to the concerned Sub Registrar, Pallipalayam and Gandhi Nagar, Coimbatore. Since the said representations have not been considered till date, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

¶29

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶30

Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

¶31

3. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon the respondents to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of Constitution of India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.

¶32

Page 3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

W.P.No.5915 of 2024

¶34

4. In view of the above observation, this Court, without going into the merits of the petitioner's representations or the contentions of the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition, directs the first and second respondents to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 23.12.2023 and 30.01.2024, seeking for revocation of the letters dated 15.01.2018, if not already disposed of and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period

¶35

of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the same to the petitioner.

¶36

5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶37

No costs.

¶38

[M.S.R., J] [S.M., J] 07.03.2024

¶39

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶40

Sni

¶41

Page 4 of 6

¶42

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

¶43

W.P.No.5915 of 2024

¶44

¶45

1.Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Southern Regional Office, Government of India, Shastri Bhavan, III Block, III Floor, 26, Haddows Road, Chennai – 600 006.

¶46

2.The Director, Directorate of Enforcement Southern Regional Office, Government of India, Shastri Bhavan, III Block, III Floor, 26, Haddows Road, Chennai – 600 006.

¶47

3.The Sub Registrar, SRO, Pallipalayam, Pallipalayam – Sankari Rd, Pallipalayam, Tamil Nadu – 638 008.

¶48

4.The Sub Registrar, SRO, Gandhipuram, 72, Saravanampatti – Kalapatti Rd, Thiruvannamail Nagar, Marvel Parambariyam, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu – 641 035.

¶49

5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶50

Page 5 of 6

¶51

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

¶52

W.P.No.5915 of 2024

¶53

M.S.RAMESH, J. and SUNDER MOHAN, J.

Sni

W.P.No.5915 of 2024

07.03.2024

Page 6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

U.Mehalashankar, v. Assistant Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

U.Mehalashankar, v. Assistant Director

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

Perumal Vs the Government of Tamil Nadu

S.Abinaya Vs the State Represented by Its

Tada Aslam Vs Inspector of Police

M.Rajamani Vs the Secretary to Government

Manimozhi Vs the State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Its

Thiagarajan Vs State Rep.by