S. Augustin Suthahar v. The Principal Secretary To
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25.09.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 & 2 of 2015 S.Augustin Suthahar ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes and Registration (M2) Department, Tamil Nadu Government, Secretariat Government Estate, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Tirunelveli.
3.The District Registrar, Registration Department, Tuticorin District, Tuticorin.
4.The Sub-Registrar, Kayalpattinam Sub-Registrar Office, Kayalpattinam, Tuticorin District.
... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records in 1/4
pursuant to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in proceedings Na.Ka.No.2235/Aa3/2015 dated 08.05.2015 and the consequential order passed by the 3rd respondent in proceedings No.2141/Aa2/2015 dated 12.6.2015 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Saravana Kumar For Respondents : Mr.S.Shanmugavel Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The writ petitioner is a practicing lawyer. He is also engaged in drafting documents. He questions the impugned communication issued by the DIG of Registration, Tirunelveli and the District Registrar, Thoothukudi, whereby the registering authorities have been directed to display the names of those documents writers and advocates found responsible for causing loss of stamp duty. The petitioner's name has been displayed in the notice board by the fourth respondent pursuant to the aforesaid communication.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterated all the contentions set out in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. He called upon this Court to set aside the impugned order and grant relief as prayed for.
3. The respondents have filed counter affidavit and the learned Additional Government Pleader took me through its contents. 2/4
4. In paragraph No.6, it is stated that it is a practice followed in the registration department to publish the names of those document writers whose drafting activities have caused loss of revenue to the Government and that therefore, the impugned communication need not be interfered with.
5. I carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the materials on record.
6. I wanted to know the statutory provision under which the impugned communication has been issued. My attention has not been drawn to any provision as such. The petitioner is entitled to carry on his avocation as document writer. It is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. His right would be assessed if aspersion is cast on him. The impugned proceedings are quashed for want of jurisdiction.
7. The Writ Petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
25.09.2023 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No rmi 3/4
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
rmi To 1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes and Registration (M2) Department, Tamil Nadu Government, Secretariat Government Estate, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Tirunelveli.
3.The District Registrar, Registration Department, Tuticorin District, Tuticorin.
4.The Sub-Registrar, Kayalpattinam Sub-Registrar Office, Kayalpattinam, Tuticorin District.
25.09.2023 4/4