A.Shrimanikandan v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 30.09.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN A.Shrimanikandan ....
Petitioner Vs 1.The District Collector, 7/1, State Bank Road, Gopalapuram, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu - 641 018.
2.The Taluk Panchayat Inspector, 7/1, State Bank Road, Gopalapuram, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu - 641 018.
3.Block Development Officer, Block Development Office, Coimbatore Road, Kinathukadavu, Pollachi - 642 109.
4.The Panchayat President, Solanur Panchayat, Palanigoundanpudur, Kinathukadavu Taluk - 642 002.
....
Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent No.1 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.06.2023 and
consequently direct the respondent No.1 to take action against the respondent No.4 for misusing his power as Panchayat President and also reconsider his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.388/2022/m3 dated 29.06.2022. For Petitioner : M/s.T.Sudha Gandhi For R1 & R2 : Mr.C.Kathiravan Special Government Pleader For R3 & R4 : Mr.M.Rajendran Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for a direction, directing the first respondent to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 05.06.2023 to take appropriate action as against the fourth respondent herein.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
3. The petitioner is the Vice President of Solanur Panchayat, Palanigoundanpudur, Kinathukadavu Taluk, Coimbatore District. The petitioner lodged a complaint as against the fourth respondent alleging that the fourth respondent misused the power as Panchayat President and
doing all illegal activities. The petitioner refused to sign for certain works which was executed on behalf of the fourth respondent. In this regard, already action has been taken as against the petitioner under Section 206 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act. After giving an opportunity of hearing and conducting a detailed enquiry, the cheque signing power of the petitioner was withdrawn. The third respondent has been appointed as cheque signing authority after the President signature. Therefore, the petitioner lodged a complaint as against the fourth respondent and filed this writ petition to consider the representation.
4. It is seen that the petitioner, without even challenging the said order, lodged a complaint as against the fourth respondent alleging several allegations. Therefore, it is nothing but counter blast and as such, this Court finds no merits in this writ petition to direct the first respondent to conduct enquiry.
5. In view of the above, this writ petition lacks merits and it is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.
30.09.2024 Internet: Yes Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order Lpp To 1.The District Collector, 7/1, State Bank Road, Gopalapuram, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu - 641 018.
2.The Taluk Panchayat Inspector, 7/1, State Bank Road, Gopalapuram, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu - 641 018.
3.Block Development Officer, Block Development Office, Coimbatore Road, Kinathukadavu, Pollachi - 642 109.
4.The Panchayat President, Solanur Panchayat, Palanigoundanpudur, Kinathukadavu Taluk - 642 002.
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J, Lpp
30.09.2024