← Library
Madras High CourtWP/10066/2024closed

P.Rajendran v. The Director

2024-04-25Honourable Mrs Justice V.Bhavani Subbaroyan5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25.04.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN P. Rajendran

...Petitioner

Vs

1. The Director, Village Panchayat Audit, Panagal Maaligai, Saidapet, Chennai.

2. The District Collector, Namakkal District, Namakkal.

3. The Assistant Director of Panchayat, Collectorate, Namakkal, Namakkal District.

4. The Block Development Officer, Pudhuchathiram Panchayat Union, Pudhuchathiram, Namakkal District.

5. S.R.K. Kandasamy

...Respondents

1/5

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner representation dated 29.02.2024 to conduct a detail enquiry against the 5th respondent and to take appropriate action including to remove the 5th respondent from the post of president in Navani Thattakkurpatti Panchayat, Namakkal District and pass orders. For Petitioner : Mr.T. Dharani For Respondents1-3 : Mrs.C. Meera Arumugam, Additional Government Pleader For Respondent-4 : Mrs.R. Anitha For Respondent-5 : Mrs.P. Ponbalaji

ORDER

The petitioner has filed this Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner representation dated 29.02.2024 to conduct a detail enquiry against the 5th respondent and to take appropriate action including to remove the 5th respondent from the post of president in Navani Thattakkurpatti Panchayat, Namakkal District. 2/5

2. The case of the petitioner is that the 5th respondent herein is holding the post of President of Navani Thattakkurpatti Panchayat since 2021and he has not followed the rules and regulations of Panchayat and committed malpractice and caused financial loss. Hence the petitioner herein gave a representation to the third respondent on 29.02.2024. However, the same was not considered till date. Hence this petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would be suffice if this Court issues a direction to the third respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 29.02.2024 and pass orders.

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent produced a letter dated 18.04.2024 in Na.Ka.No.1404/2024/thi5 from the fourth respondent , wherein it has been stated that till date they have not received any representation from the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts of the case, as the petitioner has not given any representation to the officials respondents, this petition is closed. No costs. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to give a fresh 3/5

representation to the respondent. After receipt of the representation, the respondents are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass orders as expeditiously as possible. 25.04.2024 Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order smn To

1. The Director, Village Panchayat Audit, Panagal Maaligai, Saidapet, Chennai.

2. The District Collector, Namakkal District, Namakkal.

3. The Assistant Director of Panchayat, Collectorate, Namakkal, Namakkal District.

4. The Block Development Officer, Pudhuchiram Panchayat Union, Pudhuchathiram, Namakkal District.

4/5

V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN,J.

smn 25.04.2024 5/5