Dismissed¶¶27

Chithiravel v. Deputy Inspector General of Police

Madras HC10 Oct 2025WP(MD)/5300/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ of Mandamus; Article 226 Constitution of India; departmental action; disciplinary proceedings; employer and employee; service dispute; third party locus standi; stranger; complainant in criminal case; Ranjith Prasad Vs. Union of India; AIR 2000 SC 3469; Apex Court precedent; Madras High Court Madurai Bench; W.P.(MD)No.5300 of 2024; K. Kumaresh Babu J.; representations dated 22.01.2024 and 30.01.2024; writ petition dismissed; no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Disciplinary proceedings are an essential matter between the employer and the employee. ¶¶22

Chithiravel Vs Deputy Inspector General of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.5300 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 10.10.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.5300 of 2024

¶7

Chithiravel ...Petitioner

¶8

¶9

The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Trichy Range, Trichy.

¶10

The Superintendent of Police, Pudukottai District, Pudukottai.

¶11

The District Treasury Officer, District Treasury, Pudukottai.

¶12

Mr.Mayalagu

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

¶15

praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, by directing the respondents No.1, 2 & 3 to consider and take suitable departmental action based on the petitioner's representation dated 22.1.2024 and 30.01.2024.

¶16

1/4

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.(MD)No.5300 of 2024

¶19

For Petitioner	: M/s.M.Pitchai Muthu
For Respondent
Nos.1 to 3	: Mr.M.Siddharthan Additional Government Pleader
For Respondent
No.4	: Mr.P.Arun Jayatram

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This writ petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondents No.1, 2 & 3 to consider and take suitable departmental action based on the petitioner's representation dated 22.01.2024 and 30.01.2024.

¶22

It is well settled that a third party, not connected with any service dispute, can invoke the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India to seek a mandamus to take action against any employee or official. Disciplinary proceedings is essential matter between employer and the employee and a stranger particularly, a person who was the complainant which led to a criminal case, cannot claim to initiate departmental action. The said principal has been laid down by the Honb'le Apex Court in the case of Ranjith Prasad Vs. Union of India (UoI) and Ors., reported in AIR 2000 SC 3469 .

¶23

2/4

¶24

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

¶25

W.P.(MD)No.5300 of 2024

¶26