← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/30779/2025dismissed

Suganthi v. The State Of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By The Principal Secretary To Government,

2025-10-30Honourable Mr Justice G.R.Swaminathan4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 30.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Suganthi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The State represented by The Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 9.

2.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, 3.The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar, Nanguneri Taluk, 4.Kumaravel ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first 1/4

respondent to take appropriate action against the Respondent No.2 for not executing the distraint warrant issued by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tirunelveli even after sending 4 reminder notice in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Dr.R.Alagumani For Respondents : Mr.M.Gangatharan Government Advocate for R.1 to R.3

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the official respondents. 2.The writ petitioner is the wife of the fourth respondent. The petitioner filed M.C.No.2 of 2017 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tirunelveli and a maintenance order was also passed. To execute the same, the petitioner filed Cr.M.P.No.784 of 2018. The fourth respondent neither appealed nor complied with the maintenance order. Hence, the trial Court issued restraint warrant.

2/4

3.The grievance of the petitioner is that the restraint order was not executed by the second respondent and therefore the Government should initiate action against the second respondent. The very prayer is misconceived. The petitioner's objection should be to get the restraint order enforced. Instead of doing so, the petitioner wants to put pressure on the second respondent by filing this writ petition. Such writ petitions cannot be entertained.

4.This Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. 30.10.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No MGA To 1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 9.

2.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, 3/4

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

MGA 3.The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar, Nanguneri Taluk, Copy to The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tirunelveli.

30.10.2025 4/4