S.Vaidyanathan v. The Commissioner Of Revenue

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 01.10.2019

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN W.P.No.21220 of 2004 and W.M.P.No.1697 of 2007 S.Vidyanathan ..Petitioner Vs.

1. The Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Exhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.

2. The Secretary to Government, Personnel & Administration Reforms Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.

3. The Director, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department, Anna Salai, Chenni 600 028.

4. R.Bose, The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Village Administrative Officers' Association, No.22, Venkatachalam St., Triplicane, Chennai 600 005.

..Respondents PRAYER : Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records from the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.Pani 5(1)/44045/2002 dated 13.10.2003, quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to pass a detailed order pursuant to the detailed enquiry conducted by him in furtherance of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.14252 of 2003 dated 30.04.2003.

For Petitioner : Mr.Rahul Balaji For Respondents: Mr.I.Sathish Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the first respondent, dated 13.10.2003.

2. Earlier, the writ petitioner, who was working as a Village Administrative Officer, said to have given a complaint against the fourth respondent, who was working as a Secretary, Tamil Nadu Village Administrative Officers' Association. When the complaint was not considered by the first respondent, he filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.14252 of 2003, seeking a direction to the first respondent to consider his representation. By an order dated 30.04.2003, this Court has directed the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.01.2002 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law.

3. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the first respondent has conducted an enquiry and passed the impugned order stating that, since the allegation is regarding the mismanagement of Registered Association, in which, the fourth respondent was General Secretary, the first respondent has no power to take any action. Hence, the first respondent directed the petitioner to approach the Registrar of Societies. Now, challenging that order, the present writ petition has been filed.

4. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the records carefully.

5. The petitioner has made a compliant before the fourth respondent alleging some mismanagement in the Society registered under Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. If there is any mismanagement in the registered society, it is only the Registrar of Societies has the power to deal with the same, and the first respondent has no role to play in it. Considering the same, the first respondent passed the impugned order directing the petitioner to approach the Registrar of Societies and I find no illegality or irregularity in the order passed by the first respondent and I do not find any merit in the writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. -s/d- Assistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar dua

To 1.The Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Exhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.

2.The Secretary to Government, Personnel & Administration Reforms Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.

3.The Director, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department, Anna Salai, Chenni 600 028.

+1 CC to Govt. Pleader sr 85067.

W.P.No.21220 of 2004 and W.M.P.No.1697 of 2007 PVS(CO) SP(01/11/2019)