Karuppiah v. The Distirct Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 12.01.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN W.P(MD)No.25036 of 2016 Karuppiah .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

2.The Block Development Officer, Village Panchayat, Thiruppuvanam Union, Sivagangai District. 3.Murugan, Village Panchayat Secretary, Puliyankulam Panchayat, Thiruppuvanam Union, Sivagangai District.

.. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 15.12.2016 within a time frame that may be stipulated by this Court and directing the first respondent to take necessary enquiry and action against the third respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.P.Illaiyarasu For Respondents 1 and 2 : Mr.M.Govindan, Special Government Pleader.

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM, J.] This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the first respondent to consider the representation dated 15.12.2016 and also for directing the first respondent to take appropriate action against the third respondent, by way of issuing a writ of mandamus. 2.It is averred in the petition that the petitioner is a resident of Chockanathiruppu Village, Thiruppuvanam Taluk, Sivagangai District. Further it is averred in the petition that during the relevant period, the third respondent has acted as Village Panchayat Secretary and he swindled huge amounts of public money. Under the said circumstances, a representation has been given on 15.12.2016 to the first respondent for taking appropriate action. But the first respondent has not done anything and therefore the present writ petition has been filed. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has advanced his argument on the basis of averments made in the writ petition.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 has candidly admitted to the effect that the representation given by the petitioner has not been considered. 5.Considering the fact that on 15.12.2016 the petitioner has given a representation to the first respondent with regard to alleged defalcation of third respondent and the same has not been considered, the following order can be passed. 6.In fine, this writ petition is allowed without costs and the first respondent viz., District Collector, Sivagangai District is strictly directed to consider the representation dated 15.12.2016 alleged to have been given by the petitioner and dispose of the same within a period of one month after giving proper opportunity to the persons concerned.

SD/- ASST REGISTRAR ( CS II ) TRUE COPY SUB ASST REGISTRAR To 1.The District Collector, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

2.The Block Development Officer, Village Panchayat, Thiruppuvanam Union, Sivagangai District.

1CC TO MR.P.P.ILAILYARASU, ADVOCATE SR: 2544 1CC TO THE SPL GOVT PLEADER SR: 2815 ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.25036 of 2016 12.01.2017 ANR /SKN /SAR 3/ 23 1 2016/2P:5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/