Raghunathan v. The Chief Secretary To Government
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07.10.2025 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN & W.M.P.Nos.41496 & 41498 of 2025
1. A.Raghunathan
2. Hema
3. Seetha
4. Poomadevi
5. Thangarasu ..
Petitioners Vs.
1. The Chief Secretary to Government Chief Secretariat, Goubert Avenue
2. The Secretary to Government (LA) Chief Secretariat, Goubert Avenue
3. The District Collector Revenue Complex, Pettaiyanchatiram Puducherry 605 009.
4. The Executive Engineer Buildings & Roads (Central) Public Works Department
5. The Commissioner Ariyankuppam Commune Panchayat Ariyankuppam Puducherry 605 007.
..
Respondents Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to explore the representations dated 20.12.2023, 04.01.2024, 02.09.2024, 05.02.2025, 30.05.2025, 31.05.2025, 02.06.2025 and 16.06.2025 filed before the respondents and pass an order to permit the 5 families in the government poramboke land under Re-Survey No. 70/3, Ariyankuppam, where they have been residing for over 50 years.
For Petitioners :
Mr.P.Suresh For Respondents :
Mr.S.Raveekumar Government Pleader (Pondy)
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Misuse and abuse of august forum of public interest litigation is on the rise. This is one classic example. These very petitioners, earlier joined with one R.Gopal to file W.P.No.31137 of 2025
[R.Gopal and 5 others versus Chief Secretary to Government] seeking to challenge action of removal of persons by authorities, including petitioners, by way of public interest litigation.
2. Serious exception was taken by this Court and the petition was dismissed, but with liberty to espouse individual cause holding that public interest litigation, at the hands of aggrieved person, would not be maintainable.
3. Conveniently suppressing the fact of filing earlier writ petition, petitioners herein filed this second petition, again, styled as public interest litigation. This time without impleading R.Gopal, first petitioner in earlier W.P.No.31137 of 2025. It is clear that all petitioners in the present petition were petitioners 2 to 6 in earlier petition W.P.No.31137 of 2025.
4. Unfortunately, in both the cases, counsel is one and the same.
5. Petition is dismissed with cost of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) payable to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, Chennai, within a period of two months. W.M.P.No.41496 of 2025 filed to permit petitioners to file single writ petition is allowed subject to payment of separate court-fee within two weeks. Other interim application is dismissed.
(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J) 07.10.2025 Index :
Yes/No Yes/No kpl To
1. The Chief Secretary to Government Chief Secretariat, Goubert Avenue
2. The Secretary to Government (LA) Chief Secretariat, Goubert Avenue
3. The District Collector Revenue Complex, Pettaiyanchatiram
Puducherry 605 009.
4. The Executive Engineer Buildings & Roads (Central) Public Works Department
5. The Commissioner Ariyankuppam Commune Panchayat Ariyankuppam Puducherry 605 007.
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND G.ARUL MURUGAN,J.
(kpl) 07.10.2025