Writ of mandamus seeking direction to district officials to enquire into allegations against the fourth respondent and take action. The Government Pleader, on the Block Development Officer's report, stated the allegation was false and made from personal animosity. Recording that submission, the court dismissed the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(MD) No.21069 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 26.07.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.D.KRISHNAKUMAR,
THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
W.P.(MD)No.21069 of 2018 and W.M.P.(MD)No.18861 of 2018
S.Thangaraj
... Petitioner
-Vs-
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to conduct appropriate enquiry as per the proceedings of the respondents 2 and 3 in O.Mu.OO.Ni.6/1763/2017,
Page 1 of 4
W.P.(MD) No.21069 of 2018
dated 21.04.2017 and O.Mu.OO.Ni.6/1947/2017, dated 02.05.2017 and take appropriate action against the 4th respondent.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.C.Ramalingam For R1 to R3 : Mr.P.Thilakkumar, Government Pleader
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble The ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE]
Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Government
Pleader for the respondents 1 to 3, relying upon the report submitted by the Block Development Officer / 3rd respondent, would submit that the allegation made by the petitioner against the 4th respondent is false, which was made due to personal animosity. Copy of which has also been produced before this Court.
2.Recording the said submission made by the learned Government
Pleader, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[D.K.K., A.C.J.] & [R.V., J.] 26.07.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Yuva
Page 2 of 4
W.P.(MD) No.21069 of 2018
To
Page 3 of 4
W.P.(MD) No.21069 of 2018
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, A.C.J.
AND R.VIJAYAKUMAR , J.
Yuva
W.P.(MD)No.21069 of 2018
26.07.2024
Page 4 of 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether respondents 1 to 3 should be directed to conduct an enquiry per proceedings dated 21.04.2017 and 02.05.2017 and act against the 4th respondent.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
S.Thangaraj
The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District
The Assistant Director (District Panchayat), Collectorate Office, Ramanathapuram District
The Block Development Officer, Kadaladi
Pugazhenthi
D.Krishnakumar
R.Vijayakumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
