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.

T.Muthuvijayan Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Home
Madras HC
2025
T.Muthuvijayan Vs The District CollectorT.Muthuvijayan v. The District Collector

Dismissed¶39

T.Muthuvijayan v. The District Collector

Madras HC17 Nov 2025WP(MD)/21262/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), Common Order dated 17.11.2025 by Justice P.T.Asha; W.P.(MD)Nos.21262 & 21351 of 2019 (with W.M.P(MD)Nos.17923, 17925, 19527 to 19529, 19531 to 19533, 17995 of 2019 & 10030 of 2020) DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS, no costs, connected miscellaneous petitions closed. Petitioners: T.Muthuvijayan and S.Muthuraman; Respondents: District Collector, District Forest Officer, Revenue Divisional Officer and Thasildar, Sivagangai District. Subject matter: Certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of Sl.Nos.42-45 and 46-47 of the public auction notice dated 16.09.2019 of the 2nd respondent (District Forest Officer). Counsel: M.C.Jeganathan (M/s.Veera Associates) for petitioners; Mr.D.Sasikumar, Additional Government Pleader, for respondents. No merits discussed; no precedent cited; useful only as evidence of withdrawal/infructuousness.

What did the court decide?

Having recorded the learned counsel's submission that the writ petitions had become infructuous and nothing survived to be adjudicated, the Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous. ¶39

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether Sl.Nos.42,43,44,45 of the public auction notice dated 16.09.2019 issued by the 2nd respondent were illegal and liable to be quashed (W.P.(MD)No.21262 of 2019) — pleaded issue, not adjudicated as the petition was dismissed as infructuous. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Having recorded the learned counsel's submission that the writ petitions had become infructuous and nothing survived to be adjudicated, the Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous.

Key takeaways

The dismissal was ordered without costs, and consequently the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.ratio¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Common Order — Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, 17.11.2025 (Ms. Justice P.T.Asha): W.P.(MD)Nos.21262 & 21351 of 2019, filed by T.Muthuvijayan and S.Muthuraman under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Certiorari to quash Sl.Nos.42,43,44,45 and Sl.Nos.46,47 respectively of the public auction notice dated 16.09.2019 of the 2nd respondent (District Forest Officer, Sivagangai), stand dismissed as infructuous: the learned counsel submitted that the petitions had become infructuous and nothing survived to be adjudicated, and the Court recorded the same. Dismissed with no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed. No substantive point on the legality of the auction items was adjudicated.

A

W.P.(MD)Nos.21262 & 21351 of 2019

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 17.11.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA

W.P.(MD)Nos.21262 & 21351 of 2019 and

W.M.P(MD)Nos.17923, 17925, 19527 to 19529, 19531 to 19533, 17995 of 2019 & 10030 of 2020

W.P(MD)No.21262 of 2019 :

T.Muthuvijayan

.. Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

2.The District Forest Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai

4.The Thasildar, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

.. Respondents

_________Page 1 of 5

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

W.P.(MD)Nos.21262 & 21351 of 2019

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the 2^nd respondent in public auction notice dated 16.09.2019 so far as the Sl.No.42,43,44,45 and quash the same as illegal.

W.P(MD)No.21351 of 2019 :

S.Muthuraman

.. Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

2.The District Forest Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai

4.The Thasildar, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. .. Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the 2^nd respondent in public auction

_________Page 2 of 5

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

W.P.(MD)Nos.21262 & 21351 of 2019

notice dated 16.09.2019 so far as the Sl.No.46 and 47 and quash the same as illegal.

In both cases:

For Petitioner : M.C.Jeganathan for M/s.Veera Associates For Respondents : Mr.D.Sasikumar Additional Government Pleader

COMMON ORDER

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that

the present writ petition has become infructuous and nothing survives to be adjudicated.

Recording the same, this Writ Petition stands dismissed as

infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions

are closed.

17.11.2025

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

gbg

_________Page 3 of 5

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

W.P.(MD)Nos.21262 & 21351 of 2019

To

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

2.The District Forest Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai

4.The Thasildar, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

Page 4 of 5

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

W.P.(MD)Nos.21262 & 21351 of 2019

P.T.ASHA, J.

gbg

W.P.(MD) Nos.21262 & 21351 of 2019

17.11.2025

_________Page 5 of 5

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

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether Sl.Nos.42,43,44,45 of the public auction notice dated 16.09.2019 issued by the 2nd respondent were illegal and liable to be quashed (W.P.(MD)No.21262 of 2019) — pleaded issue, not adjudicated as the petition was dismissed as infructuous.¶20
2.
Whether Sl.No.46 and 47 of the public auction notice dated 16.09.2019 issued by the 2nd respondent were illegal and liable to be quashed (W.P.(MD)No.21351 of 2019) — pleaded issue, not adjudicated as the petition was dismissed as infructuous.¶33

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226¶20

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Public auction notice dated 16.09.2019 issued by the 2nd respondent (the District Forest Officer), challenged in respect of Sl.Nos.42,43,44,45 in W.P.(MD)No.21262 of 2019 and Sl.Nos.46 and 47 in W.P.(MD)No.21351 of 2019, sought to be quashed as illegal.¶20
2nd respondent, i.e., the District Forest Officer, Sivagangai District (identity of 2nd respondent inferred from the cause title) · 16.09.2019

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
T.Muthuvijayan¶9
M.C.Jeganathan
petitioner
S.Muthuraman¶22
M.C.Jeganathan
respondent
The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai¶12
D.Sasikumar
respondent
The District Forest Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai¶13
D.Sasikumar
respondent
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai¶14
D.Sasikumar
respondent
The Thasildar, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai¶15
D.Sasikumar

Coram

AI extract

P.T.Ashaauthor¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 17 Nov 2025 · November
Registered: 3 Oct 2019
Case no.: WP(MD)/21262/2019
CNR: HCMD010922552019
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: P.t. Asha
Disposal: DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS
Case type: W.P.(MD)

Similar cases

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

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from P.t. Asha

Mangathal Vs the Registrar of Co-Operative
14 Nov 2025
K.Nayanar Vs the Assistant Engineer(Distribution)
14 Nov 2025
S.Chermadurai, Vs the Executive Officer
14 Nov 2025
S.Kousalya, Vs The Registrar
17 Nov 2025
M.Ramakrishnan Vs The District Collector
17 Nov 2025
M.Murugesan Vs Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies
17 Nov 2025

Cite this judgement

T.Muthuvijayan v. The District Collector, WP(MD)/21262/2019 (MAD), decided on 17 November 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 history1

Public auction notice dated 16.09.2019 issued by the 2nd respondent (the District Forest Officer), challenged in respect of Sl.Nos.42,43,44,45 in W.P.(MD)No.21262 of 2019 and Sl.Nos.46 and 47 in W.P.(MD)No.21351 of 2019, sought to be quashed as illegal.2nd respondent, i.e., the District Forest Officer, Sivagangai District (identity of 2nd respondent inferred from the cause title) · 16.09.2019

View full history

Bench / Coram

P.T.Asha

Parties & counsel