Madras High CourtWP/3147/2017dismissed

V.Shanmuganathan, v. The District Collector,

2017-02-08Honourable Mr Justice T.Raja3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 08.02.2017 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.No.3147 of 2017 V.Shanmuganathan ... Petitioner vs.

1. The District Collector The Office of the District Collector, Krishnagiri District.

2. The Project Director District Rural Development Authority, Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.

3. The Assistant Director (Panchayat) Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.

4. The Assistant Director (Audit) Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.

5. The Block Development Officer Uthangarai, Krishnagiri District.

6. S.Rajini Selvam ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the 1st to 5th respondents herein to consider and pass appropriate orders as per law on the petitioner's representation, dated 05.10.2015.

For petitioner : Mr.Pradeep Jayaraman For respondents : Mr.R.Govindasamy, Spl.G.P for R1 to R5

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed by V.Shanmuganathan, seeking issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 5 to consider and pass orders on his representation, dated 05.10.2015.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that on 02.10.2015, the petitioner went to Thiruvanapatti Panchayat Office at Thiruvanapatti, Krishnagiri District for taking photo for Adhar card for his son. At this time, one one Mr.Chinnasamy approached the petitioner and asked him to sign in the Grama Sabha Resolution Book. After seeing the resolution book, he was shocked to see that there is no resolution written in the book. The sign and signature of Government officials such as President and Vice-President of Thiruvanapatti Panchayat, VAO of Thiruvanapatti, Mr.Ravichandran, Cashier and other unknown officials were taken on a blank page leaving some space on the top of the resolution page to be filled later.

3. After noticing some irregularities, the petitioner has raised some objection and also protested against such illegal activities of the Panchayat President and other Government officials. After noticing the protest made by the petitioner, the fifth respondent called the petitioner inside his room. The petitioner asked the 6th respondent to explain his conduct. The 6th respondent took the Resolution note and struck the blank page where the signatures of the officials were obtained and started threatening the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner has given representation to the respondents 1 to 5 on 05.10.2015 to take appropriate action against the 6th respondent. As no action was taken, he has advised to come to this Court.

4. But this Court is not able to find any merit in the present writ petition. The reason is that neither in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition nor in the copy of the representation, dated 05.10.2015 the petitioner makes out any case warranting this Court to issue any writ or direction to consider the petitioner's representation.

5. Finding no merits whatsoever in the petitioner's representation, dated 05.10.2015, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Therefore, the writ petition fails and it is dismissed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To