Ponnusamy v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 01.11.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Ms.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA Ponnusamy ...

Petitioner /vs/

1. The District Collector, Maiyladuthurai District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Seerkali, Maiyladuthurai District.

3.The Tashildar, Tharankabadi Taluk, Maiyladuthurai District.

4.The District Registrar, Maiyladuthurai District.

5.The Superintendent of Police, Maiyladuthurai District.

6.Kalyamoorthy.

...

Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other writ or order or direction, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representations dated

11.04.2022, 13.05.2022 and 02.06.2022 consequently direct the respondents to take action against the 6th respondent.

For Petitioner ... Mr.S.N.Subramani For Respondents 1 to 5 ... Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (crl.side)

ORDER

The Writ Petition has been preferred seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representations dated 11.04.2022, 13.05.2022 and 02.06.2022 and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 5 to take action against the 6th respondent.

2. When the matter is taken up today, the learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the respondents 1 to 5 submitted that the petitioner had sent a representation to the 5th respondent; he directed the Inspector of Police, Poraiyar to enquire and the said Inspector had also directed the petitioner to present for enquiry; since the petitioner did not appear for the enquiry, the petition was closed.

3. The repeated representations sent by the petitioner is about the allegations of fraud and cheating committed by the 6th respondent and the 6th

respondent influenced the petitioner to execute a sale deed without paying the entire sale consideration. Since the 5th respondent had directed the Inspector of police, Poraiyar to conduct proper enquiry and file a report, notice have been sent to the correct address of the petitioner for enquiry. Since the petitioner did not know about the enquiry proceedings initiated by the Inspector of police, Poraiyar, I feel it is appropriate to direct the Inspector of Police, Poraiyar to reopen the petition for enquiry by sending due intimation to the 6th respondent and the petitioner.

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. 01.11.2022 jrs Internet: Yes /No Index: Yes /No Speaking / Non speaking

R.N.MANJULA, J.

jrs To

1. The Inspector of Police, Poraiyar.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

01.11.2022