K.Karuppanan v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.03.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN K.Karuppanan ... Appellant/Petitioner vs.

1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai District, Madurai.

3.Sivalingam ... Respondents/Respondents PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 21.06.2024 made in W.P(MD)No.13304 of 2024 on the file of this Court.

1/6

For Appellant : Mr.S.Mahesh Babu For Respondents : Mr.P.T.Thiraviam (R1 & R2) Government Advocate

JUDGMENT

[Judgment of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.) Challenging the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P(MD)No.13304 of 2024 dated 21.06.2024, whereby the Writ Petition was dismissed, the petitioner, as appellant, has preferred the present Writ Appeal.

2.The appellant/writ petitioner had filed the Writ Petition seeking to quash the impugned order of the second respondent dated 02.04.2024, whereby further action on his complaint against the third respondent was dropped.

2/6

3.The writ petitioner contends that he had submitted a complaint to the second respondent seeking departmental action against the third respondent, alleging that the third respondent, as Village Administrative Officer, collected taxes but refused to issue individual tax receipts. In addition, he had filed a criminal complaint and a complaint before the Human Rights Commission alleging violation of rights by the third respondent. However, departmental proceedings were closed without further action.

4.The learned Single Judge, after considering the materials on record, dismissed the Writ Petition. Aggrieved by the same, the writ petitioner has preferred the present Writ Appeal. 5.The appellant/writ petitioner further contends that although he had given a statement before the Revenue Divisional Officer, departmental proceedings were closed.

3/6

6.We are of the view that merely because a complaint has been made, it does not entitle a party to insist that departmental proceedings must necessarily culminate in an enquiry or disciplinary action. It is for the competent authority to assess the evidence and decide whether the complaint warrants further investigation or action. A mere dispute between the appellant and the third respondent cannot, as a matter of right, compel the authorities to conduct a departmental enquiry. 7.In view of the above, we do not find any merit in the Writ Appeal. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs. [N.S.K.,J.] [M.J.R.,J.] 17.03.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No ps 4/6

To 1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai District, Madurai.

5/6

N.SATHISH KUMAR ,J.

and M.JOTHIRAMAN,J.

ps DATED : 17.03.2026 6/6