Meenatchi Sundaram v. The Commissioner Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 02.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI Meenatchi Sundaram ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City.

2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Koodal Pudur Police Station, Koodal Pudur, Madurai.

3.The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Koodal Pudur Police Station (L & O), Madurai.

... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st and 3rd respondents to take necessary action based on the petitioner's representation dated 21.11.2025 within the time stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.Marimuthu M, Advocate 1/5

For Respondents : Mr.A.S.Abul Kalaam Azad, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the 1st and 3rd respondents to take necessary action based on the petitioner's representation dated 21.11.2025 within the time stipulated by this Court.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is running a lawful transport business under the name and style of "BCC Carrier" along with his brothers. His sister's son, one Balasubramani, who was employed as Manager and entrusted with maintaining accounts, abruptly stopped attending work from 01.01.2025. When the petitioner demanded settlement of the accounts, he was threatened with dire consequences.

3. On 29.01.2025, the said Balasubramani, along with his wife and ten other persons, unlawfully trespassed into the petitioner's house at Old Vilangudi by breaking open the door, assaulted the petitioner, verbally abused him in filthy language, caused damage to his property, and threatened him with dire consequences. In respect of the said occurrence, the petitioner lodged a 2/5

written complaint on 29.01.2025 with the 3rd respondent, but no action has been taken. Thereafter, a representation dated 21.11.2025 was also submitted before the 1st respondent, but the same has also not been considered. Hence, the present petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel on either side, and have perused the materials available on record.

5. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon the respondent to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, nonconsideration of the representation made by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking the extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

6. Without going into the merits of this case, this Court hereby direct the 1st and 3rd respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 21.11.2025 and deal with in accordance with law and conclude the enquiry within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 3/5

7. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. 02.12.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes mkn To 1.The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City.

2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Koodal Pudur Police Station, Koodal Pudur, Madurai.

3.The Inspector of Police, Koodal Pudur Police Station (L & O), Madurai.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

mkn 02.12.2025 5/5