D.R.Ashokkumar v. The Additional Secretary Of Tamilnadu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :23.04.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Writ Petition No.14562 of 2025 D.R.Ashokkumar, M/A 50, S/o Ranganathan, No:old No.36, New No.14, North Mada Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034.
.. Petitioner /versus/ 1.The Additional Secretary to Tamil nadu, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, Secretariat, Chennai-09.
2.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034.
3.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, EVK Sampath Road, 9th Floor, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006.
4.Mr.Srinivasan, The Manager, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, EVK Sampath Road, 9th Floor, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006.
.. Respondents 1/5
Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Manadmus directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to initiate appropriate disciplinary proceedings against the 3rd and 4th respondents and to ensure the appearance of the petitioner on behalf of his clients before the 3rd respondent in view of the petitioner's representation dated 04.04.2025 within the stipulated time in accordance with law.
For Petitioner :Mr.S.Arivazhagan For Respondents :Mr.S.Ravichandran, AGP (HR & CE) for R1 to R3
ORDER
The Writ Petition is filed directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to initiate appropriate disciplinary proceedings against the 3rd and 4th respondents to ensure appearance of the petitioner on behalf of his clients before the 3rd respondent, in view of the petitioner's representation dated 04.04.2025.
2. On a perusal of the petitioner's representtion dated 04.04.2025, the petitioner has brought to the notice of the respondents with reference to the attitude of the particular officer and he is seeking to take disciplinary action. This Court has been consistently holding that taking disciplinary action is within the domain of the respondents. Merely because a person gives a 2/5
complaint, he does not get any concomitant right by way of a Mandamus forcing the respondents to take disciplinary action.
3. The learned Additional Government Pleader (HR and CE) appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the officer has not behaved in a particular manner and there were several advocates, who were present on the same day and nobody else has complained.
4. Be that as it may, the prayer as such is not ordered. However, when the hearings are conducted, if the Members of the Bar, have any grievance, the same can also be looked into by the higher authority, so that the ultimate goal of conducting the enquiry in the respective petitions goes seamlessly and proceeds smoothly. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. 23.04.2025 ari 3/5
To 1.The Additional Secretary to Tamil nadu, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, Secretariat, Chennai-09.
2.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034.
3.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, EVK Sampath Road, 9th Floor, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006.
4.Mr.Srinivasan, The Manager, Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, EVK Sampath Road, 9th Floor, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006.
5.The Additional Government Pleader (HR & CE), High Court, Madras. 4/5
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
ari 23.04.2025 5/5