Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

M.C.Swamy Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Home
Madras HC
2025
M.C.Swamy Vs the State of Tamil NaduM.C.Swamy v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Disposed¶31

M.C.Swamy v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Mandamus – Payment of special fees

Madras HC24 Oct 2025WP/25387/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, W.P.No.25387 of 2023, decided 24.10.2025 by M.Dhandapani J. Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 by party-in-person petitioner M.C.Swamy, a practising Advocate and former Special Government Pleader (2011–2013), seeking payment of special fees for cases handled for the Tahsildar, Guindy Taluk and King's Institute; bill dated 07.01.2014, recommendation Na.Ka. No.2551Thi.Va/07 dated 10.03.2014 by Director, King's Institute, approval Ref.No.19013/P&D II (1)/2014 dated 03.12.2014 by Director of Medical Education. Dispute over whether admissible/eligible fees already paid. Direction to pay admissible fees per counter affidavit within four weeks, furnish payment date or reasons; disposed of, no costs. Keywords: special fees, government pleader, party-in-person, King's Institute, Director of Medical Education, Health and Family Welfare Department, admissible fees, four-week compliance, mandamus.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with directions to the respondents to pay the admissible fees as per the counter affidavit within four weeks, if not already paid, and to furnish the payment date (if already paid) and the reason for non-payment of the special fees; no costs. ¶31

Why is it important?

The respondents are directed to pay the admissible fees as per the counter affidavit, if not already paid, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. ¶30

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with directions to the respondents to pay the admissible fees as per the counter affidavit within four weeks, if not already paid, and to furnish the payment date (if already paid) and the reason for non-payment of the special fees; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents are liable to pay the petitioner the special fees recommended by the Director of King's Institute (Na.Ka. No.2551Thi.Va/07 dated 10.03.2014) and approved by the second respondent (Ref.No.19013/P&D II (1)/2014 dated 03.12.2014), given the parties' rival stands that the fees were not settled versus that admissible/eligible fees were already paid.

Court's answer

The respondents are directed to pay the admissible fees as per the counter affidavit, if not already paid, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

Ratio / Principle

If the fees were already paid, the respondents shall furnish the payment date; if not paid, they shall furnish the reason for not paying the special fees, so as to enable the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Mandamus – Payment of special fees – Petitioner, a practising Advocate and former Special Government Pleader for Tamil Nadu (2011–2013), who contested cases for Guindy Taluk Tahsildar and King's Institute, raised a special fee bill on 07.01.2014, scrutinized by Director of King's Institute on 10.03.2014 and approved by the Director of Medical Education on 03.12.2014, but unpaid; respondents contended the eligible bill amount stood already paid. HELD: respondents directed to pay the admissible fees as per the counter affidavit within four weeks if not already paid, and to furnish the payment date if already paid along with the reason for not paying the special fees, leaving the petitioner free to work out his remedy in the manner known to law. Writ petition disposed of. No costs.

A

W.P.No.25387 of 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 24.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

W.P.No.25387 of 2023

M.C.Swamy

... Petitioner

Vs.

1 THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT FORT ST.GEORGE,

CHENNAI – 600 009.

2 THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, POONAMALLE HIGH ROAD, KILPAUK,

CHENNAI – 600 010.

3 THE DIRECTOR, KINGS' INSTITUTE PREVENTIVE MEDICAL AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE GUINDY, CHENNAI 600 032. ... Respondents

Prayer:

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay the special fees as recommended by the Director of King's Institute vide Na.Ka. No.2551Thi.Va/07 dated 10.03.2014 and approved by the second respondent vide Ref.No.19013/P&D II (1)/2014 dated 03.12.2014.

1/4

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

W.P.No.25387 of 2023

For Petitioner : Mr.M.C.Swamy Party – In – Person For Respondents : Mr.M.Bindran for R1 to R3 Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay the special fees as recommended by the Director of King's Institute vide Na.Ka. No.2551Thi.Va/07 dated 10.03.2014 and approved by the second respondent vide Ref.No.19013/P&D II (1)/2014 dated 03.12.2014.

2.The petitioner appearing as party – in – person submitted that he is a practicing Advocate and he served as Special Government Pleader for Tamil Nadu Government from the year 2011 to 2013. During his tenure, he contested two cases on behalf of Tasildar Mambalam, Guindy Taluk and The King's Institute Vs. Kaneez Fathima and others in respect of more than 56 acres of land. The petitioner raised special fee bil on 07.01.2014 and the same was scrutinized by the Director of King's Institute on 10.03.2014 and the Director of Medical Education also approved the same vide proceedings dated 03.12.2014, however, the same has not yet been paid to him.

2/4

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

W.P.No.25387 of 2023

3.The learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the eligible bill amount was already paid to the petitioner.

4.The petitioner claimed special fees, however special fees was not paid to the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the fees was not settled to him. According to the respondents, admissible fees was already paid to the petitioner.

5.In view of the above, the respondents are directed to pay the admissible fees as per the counter affidavit, if not already paid, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and furnish the payment date, if already paid and the reason for not paying the special fees, to the petitioner so as to enable him to work out the remedy in the manner known to law.

6.The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.

24.10.2025

pri

Index: Yes/ No Speaking Order: Yes/ No NCC: Yes/ No

3/4

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

W.P.No.25387 of 2023

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

pri

To

1 THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT FORT ST.GEORGE,

CHENNAI – 600 009.

2 THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION,

POONAMALLE HIGH ROAD,

KILPAUK,

CHENNAI – 600 010.

3 THE DIRECTOR,

KINGS' INSTITUTE PREVENTIVE MEDICAL AND

RESEARCH INSTITUTE

GUINDY,

CHENNAI 600 032.

W.P.No.25387 of 2023

24.10.2025

4/4

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

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the respondents are liable to pay the petitioner the special fees recommended by the Director of King's Institute (Na.Ka. No.2551Thi.Va/07 dated 10.03.2014) and approved by the second respondent (Ref.No.19013/P&D II (1)/2014 dated 03.12.2014), given the parties' rival stands that the fees were not settled versus that admissible/eligible fees were already paid.medium confidence¶29
The court held
The respondents are directed to pay the admissible fees as per the counter affidavit, if not already paid, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶30

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226¶17

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Petitioner raised a special fee bill on 07.01.2014, which was scrutinized by the Director of King's Institute on 10.03.2014.¶24
Prior proceeding
The bill was approved by the Director of Medical Education (second respondent) vide proceedings dated 03.12.2014, but payment was allegedly not made to the petitioner.¶24
Prior proceeding
Respondents contended before this Court that the eligible bill amount had already been paid to the petitioner.¶28

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
M.C.Swamy¶21
Mr.M.C.Swamy
respondent
THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, FORT ST.GEORGE, CHENNAI – 600 009¶10
Mr.M.Bindran
respondent
THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, POONAMALLE HIGH ROAD, KILPAUK, CHENNAI – 600 010¶13
respondent
THE DIRECTOR, KINGS' INSTITUTE PREVENTIVE MEDICAL AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE, GUINDY, CHENNAI 600 032¶15

Coram

AI extract

M.DHANDAPANIauthor¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 24 Oct 2025 · October
Registered: 25 Aug 2023
Case no.: WP/25387/2023
CNR: HCMA011481392023
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: M.dhandapani
Disposal: DISPOSED OF WITH OBSERVATION
Case type: W.P.

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from M.dhandapani

S.P.Arul Kumar Vs the Managing Director
23 Oct 2025
Thirukumar Vs the District Collector
23 Oct 2025
Atul Jain Vs Union of India
23 Oct 2025
R.Gowthamrajasekar Vs K.Anand and another
24 Oct 2025
Sridhar Ramanathan Vs the Foreigners Regional Registration Office
24 Oct 2025
Tpc Infra and Green Energies Vs Union of India
24 Oct 2025

Cite this judgement

M.C.Swamy v. the State of Tamil Nadu, WP/25387/2023 (MAD), decided on 24 October 2025.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226

View all statutes

Procedural history3

Petitioner raised a special fee bill on 07.01.2014, which was scrutinized by the Director of King's Institute on 10.03.2014.
The bill was approved by the Director of Medical Education (second respondent) vide proceedings dated 03.12.2014, but payment was allegedly not made to the petitioner.

View full history

Bench / Coram

M.DHANDAPANI

Parties & counsel