M.Aanandha Lakshmi v. The Chairman

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.06.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE M.Aanandha Lakshmi ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Chairman, Bar Council of India, No. 21, Rouse Avenue, Institutional Area, New Delhi 110 002.

2. The Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Pudhucherry, High Court Premises, Chennai 600 104.

3. The Registrar, The Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Poompozhil, No. 5, Dr. D.G.S. Dinakaran Salai, Chennai 600 026.

1/8

4. The Registrar, Hindustan Institute of Technology and Science, No. 1, Rajiv Gandhi Salai (Omr), Padur, Kelampakkam, Chennai 603 103.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing 4th respondent to refund the fee Rs. 1,22,500/- (Rupees One Lakh Twenty Two Thousand and five hundred only) to the petitioner along with the monetary compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- for the loss of precious time and age and physical and mental sufferings caused due to the negligence and lethargic acts committed by the 4th respondent, by fixing a time limit on the basis of the petitioner's representations dated 31.01.2025 and 25.03.2025.

For Petitioner :

Mr.P Krishnasamy, For Respondent :

Mr.K.R.Laxman (R2) Standing Counsel :

Mr.B.Brijesh Kishore (R3)

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.] The Writ of Mandamus has been instituted to direct the respondent to refund the fee amount. The fourth respondent is the 2/8

Hindustan Institute of Technology and Science, which is a private institution.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is a deemed University under the University Grants Commission Act.

3. However, this Court finds that the fourth respondent situates at Chennai and none of the respondents are falling within the jurisdiction of the Madurai Bench. That apart, the dispute is relating to refund of fees which is a disputed fact to be adjudicated before the competent forum. Therefore, the petitioner is at liberty to redress her grievances before the competent forum and in the manner known to law. 4.With the above observations, this writ petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

[S.M.S., J.] [A.D.M.C., J.] 24.06.2025 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No NCC:Yes/No LR 3/8

To

1. The Chairman, Bar Council of India, No. 21, Rouse Avenue, Institutional Area, New Delhi 110 002.

2. The Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Pudhucherry, High Court Premises, Chennai 600 104.

4/8

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

and DR.A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.

LR 24.06.2025 5/8

W.P.(MD) No.17079 of 2025 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

AND DR.A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.] This Writ Petition is listed today under the caption 'for being mentioned' at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has made an endorsement in the case bundle, while disposing of the writ petition, that he is not pressing the petition, but the said words are missing in the order dated 24.06.2025 and wants to modify the order dated 24.06.2025.

3. Considering the above, Registry is directed to correct paragraph 4 of the order dated 24.06.2025 as follows and issue corrected copy: "With the above observation, this Writ Petition stands disposed of as not pressed with liberty to the 6/8

petitioner to file a petition before the appropriate Court. There shall be no order as to costs." [S.M.S., J.] [A.D.M.C., J.] 08.07.2025 abr 7/8

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

AND DR.A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.

abr W.P.(MD) No.17079 of 2025 08.07.2025 8/8