← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/660/2022dismissed as infructuous

Pathinettu Valiparkal Dharga v. The Inspector General Of Registration

2023-03-06Honourable Mr Justice C.V. Karthikeyan5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 06.03.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN W.P(MD).No.660 of 2022 Pathinettu Valiparkal Dharga Administrative Committee, Rep. by its Secretary, Mohammed Abdul Kadar ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai- 600028.

2. The District Registrar, Office of the District Registration, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

3. The Sub- Registrar, Keelakarai Sub-Division, Keelakarai, Ramanathapuram District.

4. The WAKF Superintendent, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

5. The WAKF Inspector, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

1/5

6. Ushvatthun Hasana Muslim Sangam, Rep. by its Secretary, Janab Sathak Ansari

7. Kadel Sahibu Family Trust, Rep by its Founder and Managing Director ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd Respondent to conduct the enquiry, as per the Circular vide Letter No.20217/U1/2021, dated 9.7.2021, based on the Petitioner's representation, dated 20.09.2021 and complete the same within a time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Veerakumar For R1 to R3 : Mr.M.Prakash Additional Government Pleader For R4, R5 : Mr.N.Mohideen Basha For R6 : Mr.H.Jasimayasmin for Ajmal Associates 2/5

O R D E R

When the matter was taken up for hearing today, it is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue raised in this Writ Petition has now become infructuous. Hence, no further adjudication is required.

2.However, the learned counsel for the 6th respondent has raised a grievance that the petitioner had approached various Forums for the very same relief. It is alleged that the petitioner had indulged in forum shopping and there is suppression of materials of facts. It is therefore urged that this necessitates this Court to impose costs on the petitioner. 3.It is seen that the Forums, the petitioner had approached are all Authorities created by the Statute and recognized in law. If the petitioner had approached any extra Judicial Forum or Kangaroo Court, those representations would be considered in proper light. 3/5

4.Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. The sixth respondent is at liberty to file separate proceedings, if so advised.

06.03.2023 NCS : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet: Yes/ No PNM To

1. The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai- 600028.

2. The District Registrar, Office of the District Registration, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

3. The Sub- Registrar, Keelakarai Sub-Division, Keelakarai, Ramanathapuram District.

4. The WAKF Superintendent, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

5. The WAKF Inspector, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

4/5

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

PNM ORDER IN W.P(MD).No.660 of 2022 W.M.P(MD)No.417 and 418 of 2022 06.03.2023 5/5