Ranganathan v. The Tahsildar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28/08/2015 C O R A M THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN W.P. No.17093 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015 Ranganathan

...Petitioner

Vs

1. The Tahsildar, Sankarapuram Taluk, 606 401, Villupuram District.

...Respondent

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the entire records of the respondent in his Na.Ka.A3/7863/2015, dated 23.05.2015 and quash the same and consequently forbear the respondent from in any manner cancelling the community certificates issued in favour of the petitioner's sons Minors Ajith and Anandraj respectively in AE8D676D6A687B86 in R.Dis.12748, dated 05.05.2015 and BA8D676D6A687B86 in R.Dis.12754, dated 05.05.2015. For petitioner Mr. P. Srinivas For respondent Mr. N. Sakthivel Govt. Advocate

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI, J.) With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

Assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 23.05.2015 passed by the respondent, whereunder, the community certificates granted to the petitioners' sons, by the respondent were cancelled, the petitioner has come up with the instant petition on the prime ground that he was not afforded an opportunity of hearing before the impugned order was passed.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

We have examined all the documents appended to the writ petition and also considered the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

It is to be noted that pursuant to the notice dated 20.05.2015, the petitioner has filed his reply on 23.05.2015. Having regard to the nature of the certificates and also the cancellation order, which deals with the social status of a person and having serious ramifications on his career, we are of the considered view that one more opportunity be afforded to the petitioner to place his case supported by all the relevant documents before the authority/respondent.

Accordingly, two weeks time is granted to the petitioner to make a representation along with the relevant documents to the respondent to establish that the certificates produced by him before the authority on the earlier round, were genuine and not bogus. Thereafter, the respondent shall consider the petitioner's representation and take a decision, on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, M.P. No. 1 of 2015 is closed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ra To The Tahsildar, Sankarapuram Taluk, 606 401, Villupuram District.

+ 1 cc to Mr.P. Srinivas, Advocate Sr.46068 + 1 cc to Government Pleader Sr.46225 W.P. No. 17093 of 2015 VGI(CO) Eu 11.09.15 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/