M.Munisekar v. The Commissioner Of Land Administration
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.03.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA M.Munisekar ...
Petitioner versus 1.The Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagaam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
2.The District Collector, Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruthani Range, Thiruthani, Tiruvallur District.
4.P.N.Sathish Village Administrative Officer, Kilambakkam Village, Tiruvallur Taluk & District.
...
Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to take departmental action and suspend the 4th respondent based on the petitioner's representation dated 21.10.2019. For Petitioner :
Mr.R.S.Manoj Kumar 1/5
For Respondent Nos.1 to 3 :
Mr.S.Arumugam Government Advocate For Respondent No.4 :
No Appearance
O R D E R
Heard Mr.R.S.Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Arumugam, learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 3 and perused the materials available on record. 2.
There is no representation for the 4th respondent either in-person or through his counsel.
3.
The petitioner has filed this petition seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to take departmental action against the 4th respondent by placing him under suspension. 4.
It is the case of the petitioner that the 4th respondent was working as a Village Administrative Officer of Veeraragavapuram Village at Thirutani Taluk, Thiruvarur District. Due to the illegal activities of the 4th respondent, the petitioner and other villagers have been affected. Hence, the petitioner has made several complaints against the 4th respondent to take 2/5
action for his illegal activities. But so far no action has been taken by the respondents 1 to 3. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.
5.
So far as the contract of employment between the respondents 1 to 3 and the 4th respondent is concerned, the petitioner is a third party and he is not a privy to the contract of employment. It is seen from the records that Domestic Violence cases are pending against the 4th respondent. However, the petitioner claims that all those cases have already been disposed. For every disgruntlement against a Government Official, an employer cannot be directed to initiate disciplinary action. It is within the discretion of the controlling authority to initiate any such action if he deems it fit. Hence, this Writ Petition is not maintainable and the same is dismissed accordingly. No costs.
05.03.2024 Speaking order / Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No : Yes / No sri 3/5
To 1.The Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagaam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
2.The District Collector, Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruthani Range, Thiruthani, Tiruvallur District.
4.P.N.Sathish Village Administrative Officer, Kilambakkam Village, Tiruvallur Taluk & District.
4/5
R.N.MANJULA , J.
sri 05.03.2024 5/5