Marimuthu T v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 21.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI WP(MD)No.1122 of 2026 and WMP(MD)No.867 of 2026 T.Marimuthu ... Petitioner Vs

1. The District Collector, District Collectorate,

2. The Personal Assistant to District Collector (Panchayat Development), District Collectorate,

3. The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayats), Block Development Office, Papanasam Panchayat Union,

4. Jayachithra Noon Meal Organizer, Government Aided Higher Secondary School, Umayalpuram, Papanasam Taluk, ... Respondents 1/6

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned report dated 22.07.2025 of the 2nd respondent, which was on the file of the 3rd respondent in proceedings Na.Ka.No.1451/2024/A5, quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the 2nd respondent to take action against the 4th respondent for violating Rule 7 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servant Conduct Rules, 1973.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.N.Ramanathan For R1 and R2 : Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar, Special Government Pleader For R3 : Mr.B.Saravanan, Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

The petitioner is the brother of the 4th respondent's husband. He is having a civil dispute with his brother. The petitioner's brother has created a document in favour of the 4th respondent. Therefore, the petitioner has lodged a complaint before the District Crime Branch, Thanjavur. On investigation, the District Crime Branch has found that the document has been created without any valid title document and also filed a final report as against the petitioner's brother and the 4th 2/6

respondent. The 4th respondent appears to have been added as an accused, since she is the recipient of the document. By referring the criminal complaint, the petitioner submitted a representation to the 3rd respondent, who in turn forwarded the same to the 2nd respondent, who is the competent authority to take action as against the 4th respondent. The 2nd respondent, by proceedings dated 22.07.2025, has rejected the request of the petitioner that the criminal case is still pending trial and they would take a decision depending upon the outcome of the criminal case. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

2. Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2 and submits that the 4th respondent is working as a part-time Noon Meal Organizer and she is the recipient of the document. On the very same subject matter, a civil suit is pending and the criminal trial is also pending. Therefore, the petitioner was informed that further course of action would be taken, depending upon the outcome of the criminal and civil cases. 3/6

3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the reasoning given by the 2nd respondent, rejecting the petitioner's request that they would take further course of action depending upon the outcome of the criminal and civil matters, is appropriate. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same.

4. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 21.01.2026 ogy Index : Yes / No.

Internet : Yes / No.

NCC : Yes / No.

To

1. The District Collector, District Collectorate,

2. The Personal Assistant to District Collector (Panchayat Development), District Collectorate, 4/6

3. The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayats), Block Development Office, Papanasam Panchayat Union, 5/6

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

ogy WP(MD) No.1122 of 2026 21.01.2026 6/6