Madras High CourtWP(MD)/20069/2014disposed of

P. Raja, v. The District Collector,

2015-06-25Honourable Mr Justice R. Mahadevan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.06.2015

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P(MD)No.20069 of 2014 P.Raja ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

2.The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Union, Nilakkottai, Dindigul District.

... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to conduct an enquiry on the petitioner's representations dated 07.07.2014 and 09.09.2014.

For Petitioner ... Mr.T.K.Gopalan For Respondents ... Mr.M.Murugan, Government Advocate for R.1 Mr.D.Muruganantham, Additional Govt. Pleader for R.2

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to conduct an enquiry on the petitioner's representations dated 07.07.2014 and 09.09.2014.

2. Heard both sides.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner made a representations dated 07.07.2014 and 09.09.2014 to the first respondent seeking to conduct an enquiry against the President of Vilampatty Panchayat, alleging that she misappropriated the funds of the Panchayat and till date, the same has not been considered by the authority concerned and hence, the present writ petition.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submitted that though the petitioner has made the representations dated 07.07.2014 and 09.09.2014 to the first respondent, alleging that the President of the Village Panchayat concerned has misappropriated the funds of the Panchayat, the first respondent did not initiate any action in this regard till date and hence, prayed for the above relief.

5. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent, on instructions, submitted that the relief sought for by the petitioner is misconceived as the first respondent had already considered the representation of the petitioner and initiated appropriate proceedings, by calling for report from the authority concerned and ultimately, the first respondent has passed the order vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.1826/2014, dated 08.10.2014, appointing the Block Development https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Officer to sign the cheques, in the interest of the general public.

6. The said submission of the learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent, is placed on record.

7. In view of the above, this writ petition is closed, as no further orders are necessary. No costs.

Sd/- The Assistant Registrar(RTI) /True copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To:

1.The District Collector, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

2.The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Union, Nilakkottai, Dindigul District.

+1cc to Mr.PT.S.Narendravasan, Advocate SR.NO.34084 rsb sm:14.07.2015:2P/4C W.P(MD)No.20069 of 2014 25.06.2015 3/3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/