← Library
Madras High CourtWP/18542/2016disposed of

P.R.Rangarajan, v. The District Collector,

2016-05-27Honourable Mr Justice M.V. Muralidaran4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 27.05.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN Writ Petition No.18542 of 2016 and W.M.P.Nos.16238 and 16239 of 2016 P.R.Rangarajan .. Petitioner -Versus1.The District Collector, Coimbatore District, Coimbatore.

2.The Tahsildar, Mettupalayam, Coimbatore District.

.. Respondents Prayer: Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records on the file of the 2nd respondent in connection with the order passed by him in his Prco.Na.Ka.1653/2016A4 dated 2.3.2016 and Na.Ka.1653/2016A4 dated 23.5.2016. For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Singaravelan Senior Counsel for M/s.M.Srividya For Respondents :

Mrs.Kavitha

O R D E R

The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition challenging the impugned order dated 23.5.2016 issued by the Tahsildar, the second respondent herein, directing the petitioner to appear for enquiry on 31.05.2016 for the enquiry proposed under Section 205(2) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act. 2.The case of the petitioner is that earlier, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the first respondent, the District Collector, Coimbatore dated 9.1.2014 by filing a Writ Petition in W.P.No.6215 of 2014. Considering the case of the petitioner, this Court by an order dated 19.01.2016, while

rejecting the petitioner's prayer to quash the impugned show cause notice dated 09.01.2014 had issued a direction to the respondent therein to furnish a copies of the letters/orders, dated 03.12.2013 and 06.01.2014 to the petitioner, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. On receipt of those copies, the petitioner was directed to submit his explanation to the show cause notice within a period of two weeks thereon, after which, the respondent therein shall consider the same and proceed in accordance with law after complying the principles of natural justice and pass final orders within a period of eight weeks therefrom. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 15.02.2016 requesting the District Collector, Coimbatore to extend the time by two weeks for giving explanation. But the same was rejected by the District Collector, Coimbatore by order dated 22.02.2016, which was received by the petitioner on 29.02.2016. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 02.03.2016 to the Block Development Officer, Karamadai in-person.

But without considering the same, the second respondent Tahsildar by order dated 02.03.2016 issued an enquiry notice directing the petitioner to appear for enquiry on 12.03.2016 at 11.00 a.m. in Marudur Panchayat Union Office. Thereafter, the said enquiry was adjourned due to the election.

3.Subsequently, the present impugned order dated 23.05.2016 was issued by the second respondent directing the petitioner to appear for enquiry on 31.05.2016 at 11.00 a.m. under Section 205

(2) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act. Challenging the above said notice, the present Writ Petition has been filed. 4.Heard Mr.R.Singaravelan, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs.Kavitha, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

5.The case of the petitioner is that though this Court directed the petitioner to give explanation within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and thereafter, he has given a letter to the District Collector, Coimbatore, to extend the time for two weeks for filing his explanation, but it was refused by the first respondent by order dated 22.02.2016, which was received by the petitioner on 29.02.2016. Immediately within two days, i.e. on 02.03.2016, the petitioner has submitted his explanation to the show cause notice. But without considering the same, the second respondent, Tahsildar, pursuant to the order of the District Collector directed the petitioner to appear for enquiry on 31.05.2016. Therefore, before considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner on 02.03.2016, the very calling for enquiry on 31.05.2016 is illegal and against the Panchayat Act. Hence, the petitioner requested to quash the said notice dated 23.05.2016.

6.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner's request to the District Collector/ first respondent herein, to extend the time by two weeks for giving his explanation was rejected by the District Collector on 22.02.2016. She had further submitted that the petitioner's explanation dated 02.03.2016 was not received by them and hence, they have not considered and the present notice was issued. Therefore, the issuance of very notice dated 23.05.2016 is valid in law.

7. In pursuance of the direction of this Court, the petitioner approached District Collector seeking two weeks time to submit the explanation, but the said request of the petitioner was rejected by the District Collector vide order dated 22.02.2016.

8.Admittedly, when the petitioner has given his explanation on 02.03.2016 in person, it is the bounden duty of the first respondent to pass orders on the explanation given by the petitioner and thereafter only, he ought to have conducted the enquiry under Section 205(2) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act. Therefore, I am inclined to pass the following order: (a)The present impugned notice dated 23.05.2016 is hereby set aside.

(b)The respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's explanation dated 02.03.2016 within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if the said explanation dated 02.03.2016 is available on record.

(c)Till orders are passed on such explanation, the respondents are directed to postpone the enquiry and after passing the final order, the respondents are at liberty to proceed with the enquiry under Section 205(2) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act. 9.With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

cse/ssd Sd/- Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar

To 1.The District Collector, Coimbatore District, Coimbatore.

2.The Tahsildar, Mettupalayam, Coimbatore District.

+ 1 cc to M/s.M.Srividya, Advocate Sr 28928 + 1 cc to The Govt.Pleader, Sr 28959 KR/1/6/16 Writ Petition No.18542 of 2016 and W.M.P.Nos.16238 and 16239 of 2016