Mariappan .P v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 27.02.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and W.M.P.(MD)No.410 of 2024 P.Mariappan ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector, Collectorate, Thoothukudi District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o. The Revenue Divisional Office, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District.
3.The Block Development Officer, Village Panchayat, Kovilpatti Block, Thoothukudi District.
4.The Assistant Director of Panchayat, O/o. The Assistant Director, Collectorate, Thoothukudi District.
5.The Panchayat President, Mela Eral Village Panchayat, Ettayapuram Taluk, Thoothukudi District.
6.P.Annalakshmi ... Respondents 1/4
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the Impugned order in Oo.Ni.5/6607/2023 dated 12.12.2023 on the file of the Respondent No.1 to quash the same as illegal and consequently, to issue a direction directing the 1st Respondent to restore the cheque signing power to the petitioner as Vice President of Mela Eral, Ettayapuram taluk, Thoothukudi district.
For Petitioner : Mr.I.Pinaygash For Respondents : Mr.A.Kannan Additional Government Pleader for R1, R2 & R4 : Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam Government Advocate for R3 & R5 : no appearance for R6
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for R1, R2 & R4 and the learned Government Advocate for R3 & R5. Though the name of the sixth respondent is printed in the cause list, she has not chosen to enter appearance.
2. The petitioner was elected as vice president of the Mela Eral Panchayat. The petitioner's cheque signing power was taken away by the impugned order. The reason for issuing such proceedings was that the 2/4
petitioner was not extending his cooperation in signing the cheque. As a result, several payments could not be disbursed.
3. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, the petitioner through his counsel gave an undertaking that in future, he will extend his fullest cooperation to the panchayat president and sign the cheques. If the expenditure in question has been approved by the jurisdictional BDO, the petitioner will not delay or refuse to put his signature. The petitioner is warned that if this undertaking given before this Court is resiled from, this Court will not hesitate to initiate action against the petitioner.
4. Recording the undertaking of the petitioner to extend his fullest cooperation with the sixth respondent, the first respondent is directed to issue fresh proceedings restoring the petitioner's cheque signing power. This shall be done immediately and without any delay. The Writ Petition is allowed on these terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 27.02.2024 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No rmi 3/4
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
rmi To 1.The District Collector, Collectorate, Thoothukudi District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o. The Revenue Divisional Office, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District.
3.The Block Development Officer, Village Panchayat, Kovilpatti Block, Thoothukudi District.
4.The Assistant Director of Panchayat, O/o. The Assistant Director, Collectorate, Thoothukudi District.
5.The Panchayat President, Mela Eral Village Panchayat, Ettayapuram Taluk, Thoothukudi District.
27.02.2024 4/4