← Library
Madras High CourtWP/19764/2015dismissed

A.P.John Paulraj v. Dr.Thandavan

2022-04-08Honourable Mr Justice M. Govindaraj2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 08.04.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ W.P.No.19764 of 2015 A.P.John Paulraj ... Petitioner Vs.

Dr.Thandavan ... Respondent PRAYER: The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to pay the cost of expenses and damages to the tune of Rs.1.00 Crore in respect of the delayed reply given by the respondents to the petitioner's representations and legal notices dated 12.01.2011, 13.01.2011, 03.03.2011, 25.07.2012 and 31.08.2012 and consequently, in conducting the cases.

For Petitioner : M/s.S.Dakshinamurthy For Respondent : M/s.V.Sudha

O R D E R

The petitioner has preferred the above Writ Petition for a direction directing the respondent to pay costs of expenses and damages to the tune of Rs.1.00 Crore in respect of the delayed reply given by the respondent to the petitioner's representations and legal notices dated 12.01.2011, 13.01.2011, 03.03.2011, 25.07.2012 and 31.08.2012.

2. This Writ Petition is filed against the Vice Chancellor in individual capacity and against the Registrar of the respondent University. Now that the petitioner has quantified the damages and expenses for making complaints and various representations and expenses incurred towards filing of the Writ Petition, etc. to the tune of Rs.5,06,50,000/-, it is to be seen whether the petitioner is entitled to get any reply or not? whether the respondent has unduly delayed in giving information,

which the petitioner is entitled to?, whether this delay in giving this letter and replies caused mental agony or not? and whether the petitioner's status and the quantum of damages as claimed by him are matters for evidence.

3.This Court sitting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot decide the entitlement of quantum of damages and all other factual aspects of mental agony and delay. Therefore, this Writ Petition on these aspects is not maintainable and hence, the same is dismissed giving liberty to the petitioner to workout his remedy in the manner known to law. There shall be no order as to costs.

SD/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SUB ASSISTANT REGISTRAR asi +1cc to M/s.V.Sudha, Advocate Sr.24477 W.P.No.19764 of 2015 skm[co] srg 28/04/2022