Disposed¶29

G.Vijayalakshmi v. the District Collector

Madras HC2 Jun 2026WP/19242/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras HC (M. Dhandapani, J.) disposes W.P.No.19242 of 2026 (G.Vijayalakshmi v. District Collector, Kallakurichi District and others): mandamus under Article 226 seeking action under Section 205 of the Panchayat Act on a 09.03.2026 representation alleging misappropriation of Village Panchayat development funds by respondent 4 (Amutha); Court directs consideration of the representation within 12 weeks without going into merits; notice to respondent 4 dispensed with; no costs.

What did the court decide?

First respondent directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 09.03.2026 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within 12 weeks of receipt of the order, after providing opportunity to the fourth respondent; no order as to costs. ¶29

G.Vijayalakshmi Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the first respondent (District Collector) should be directed to take action as contemplated under Section 205 of the Panchayat Act, including initiation of criminal proceedings against the fourth respondent, on the petitioner's representation dated 09.03.2026. +1 more

¶20

Court's answer

Without going into the merits of the case, the Court directs the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 09.03.2026 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within 12 weeks from receipt of a copy of the order, after providing opportunity to the fourth respondent.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

Notice to the fourth respondent is dispensed with, since no adverse order is going to be passed against her.

¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the District Collector, Kallakurichi District (first respondent) to act on the petitioner's representation dated 09.03.2026 as contemplated under Section 205 of the Panchayat Act, including initiation of criminal proceedings against the fourth respondent (Amutha) for alleged misappropriation of Village Panchayat development funds. Counsel for the petitioner confined the request to consideration of the representation within a stipulated time. M.Dhandapani, J., without going into the merits and dispensing with notice to the fourth respondent on the ground that no adverse order was contemplated, disposed of the writ petition directing the first respondent to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within 12 weeks from receipt of a copy of the order, after providing opportunity to the fourth respondent. No order as to costs.

¶1

W.P.No.19242 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 02.06.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.No. 19242 of 2026

G.Vijayalakshmi

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Kallakurichi District.

¶10

2.The Block Development Officer, Ulundurpettai Panchayat Union, Kallakurichi District.

¶11

3.The Zonal Deputy Block Development Officer (Zone-4), Ulundurpettai Panchayat Union, Kallakurichi District.

¶12

4.Amutha

¶13

...Respondents

¶14

Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to take necessary action as contemplated under Section 205 of the Panchayat Act, including initiation of criminal proceedings as against the fourth respondent for the acts of misappropriation and other related offences based on the petitioner’s representation dated 09.03.2026 within the time frame stipulated by this Court.

¶15

Page1 of 5

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.No.19242 of 2026

¶18

For Petitioner : Ms.A.Shanmugapriya For Respondent : Mr.C.Prabhakaran Government Counsel for R1 to R3

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the first respondent to take necessary action as contemplated under Section 205 of the Panchayat Act, including initiation of criminal proceedings as against the fourth respondent for the acts of misappropriation and other related offences based on the petitioner’s representation dated 09.03.2026 within a time frame stipulated by this Court.

¶21

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner and other villagers made a representation on 09.03.2026 before the first respondent against the fourth respondent for having misappropriated the funds of the Village Panchayat allocated for development activities, however, no action was taken. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶22

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that it would

¶23

suffice, if the first respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 09.03.2026 on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period.

¶24

__________ Page2 of 5

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.No.19242 of 2026

¶27

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3. Since no adverse order is going to be passed against the fourth respondent, notice to the fourth respondent is dispensed with.

¶28

In view of the limited request made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 09.03.2026 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after providing opportunity to the fourth respondent.

¶29