← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/183/2015dismissed

K. Sankaran(Sub Inspector Of v. The Chief Secretary

2015-01-08Honourable Mr Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.01.2015 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU Writ Petition (MD) No.183 of 2015 and MP(MD)Nos.1 & 2 of 2015 K.Sankaran (Sub Inspector of Surveyor) ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, O/o.Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

2. The Secretary, Revenue and Survey Department, Secretariat,Chennai 600 009.

3. The Commissioner cum Director, Survey and Settlement Department, Survey House, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.

4. The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

5. P.Raju, [Retd.] The Assistant Director (Survey and Land Records) O/o.Tirunelveli Collectorate, Kokirakulam, Tirunelveli.

6. Duraisamy, Taluk Deputy Surveyor, Shenkottai Taluk Office, Shenkottai, Tirunelveli District.

7. Kottiappan, Sub Inspector of Surveyor, Sankarankoil Taluk Office, Tirunelveli District.

8. Shanthi, Taluk Deputy Surveyor, Sivagiri Taluk Office, Tirunelveli District.

... Respondents

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to initiate departmental proceedings against the respondents 5 to 8.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.D.Ganeshamoorthy For Respondents 1-4 : Mr.D.Muruganandam, Additional Government Pleader.

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.D.Muruganandam, learned Additional Government Pleader, who takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 4. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage.

2.The petitioner seeks for a Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to initiate departmental proceedings against the respondents 5 to 8.

3.It is seen that the petitioner is seeking departmental action against the respondents 5 to 8 on the ground that they have passed repeated order of transfers as well as order of compulsory retirement against the petitioner. It is also seen that the petitioner has challenged those proceedings then and there. When that being the factual position, I am not able to appreciate that the petitioner's claim has any bona fide in seeking for departmental proceedings against the respondents 5 to 8 merely because they issued some transfer orders and order of compulsory retirement against the petitioner. Needless to mention that if any adverse order is passed against the petitioner, it is for him to challenge the same before the Court of law and he cannot seek departmental proceedings against any person who issued the said order.

4.With the above observation, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(C.O.,) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar

To

1. The Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, O/o.Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

2. The Secretary, Revenue and Survey Department, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

3. The Commissioner cum Director, Survey and Settlement Department, Survey House, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.

4. The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

+1cc to Mr.A.D.Ganeshamoorthy, Advocate, in SR. No.1411. +1cc to Special Government Pleader, in SR No.982. Writ Petition (MD) No.183 of 2015 08.01.2015 sms msm 13.01.2015 p3/7c