Sathrak v. Regional Deputy Director

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH and WMP (MD) Nos.8254 & 8256 of 2025 Sathrak : Petitioner Vs.

1. Regional Deputy Director, Khadi and Village Industries, No. 10, 1st Floor, Near P.R.C. Depot, Bye Pass Road, Shri Velmurugan Nagar, Madurai- 625010.

2. Assistant Director, Khadi and Village Industries, Collector Office Campus, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

3. Y.Nalla Thampi, Assistant Director, Khadi and Village Industries, Collector Office Campus, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

: Respondents P RAYER:

Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No. 63/2022/C 1/6

dated 13.03.2025 and quash the same as illegal. For Petitioner : Ms.J.Aswini For Respondents : Mr.J.K.Jayaselan Government Advocate for R1 & R2

O R D E R

The present writ petition has been filed challenging the disqualification order dated 13.03.2025, passed by the second respondent.

2. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. Having regard to the nature of the order proposed to be passed in this writ petition, notice to the third respondent is dispensed with.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has been passed by the second respondent as a consequence of a prior complaint made by the petitioner against the second respondent, alleging misappropriation in the construction of the Society godown during the year 2019-2020. Furthermore, the second 2/6

respondent has passed the said order in violation of the judgment rendered by a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD) No.293 of 2024. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has now filed the present writ petition.

4. The learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2, submits that the communication in question is merely an internal correspondence issued in the course of administrative functioning and does not, by itself, create or take away any rights or obligations of the petitioner. As such, the present writ petition filed challenging an internal communication, is not maintainable.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents.

6. Upon consideration of the submissions made and the materials placed on record, it is seen that the impugned communication, which is sought to be challenged, is merely an internal administrative correspondence issued by the third respondent to the President of the Marthandam Beekeepers Co-operative Society. The petitioner has not 3/6

demonstrated any infringement of a legal right that would warrant the interference of this Court in respect of the said communication. In view of the above, the writ petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.

22.04.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No PKN 4/6

To

1. Regional Deputy Director, Khadi and Village Industries, No. 10, 1st Floor, Near P.R.C. Depot, Bye Pass Road, Shri Velmurugan Nagar, Madurai- 625010.

2. Assistant Director, Khadi and Village Industries, Collector Office Campus, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

3. Y.Nalla Thampi, Assistant Director, Khadi and Village Industries, Collector Office Campus, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

5/6

VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

PKN W.P.(MD) No.11092 of 2025 22.04.2025 6/6