SUSILAMMA Vs the State Rep. by

Susilamma vs the State Rep. by

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Apr 06, 2026

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1435978

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1435978
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani
Decided On: Apr 06, 2026
Case Number: WP/12624/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Susilamma

Respondent

the State Rep. by

Excerpt

.....are extreme precarious and uncertain. it is the grievance of the petitioners that though they were fully eligible to benefit under the scheme of kalaignar magalir urimai thogai scheme, they were not granted the benefits. hence, they made several representations on 16.12.2025, 02.01.2026, 13.01.2026, 28.01.2026, 19.02.2026 and 20.02.2026 which are pending without consideration. hence, this writ petition.5. the learned additional advocate general submitted that the petitioners' representations will be considered within a period of twelve weeks. accordingly, he prayed for orders.6. heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record.7. considering the facts and circumstance of the case, this court withoutgoing into the merits of the case directs the respondents to consider the petitioners representations dated 06.12.2025, 02.01.2026, 13.01.2026, 28.01.2026, 19.02.2026 and 20.02.2026 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.8. accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. no costs. 06-04-2026 dhk index:yes/nospeaking/non-speaking orderinternet:yes neutral citation:yes/no to 1.the chief secretary state secretariat office, st. cheorge fort, chennai-600 009 2.the district collector o/o.district collector, krishnagiri district. 3.the sub collector o/o.sub collector, hosur. 4.revenue divisional officer o/o.revenue divisional hosur. 5.the tahsildar o/o.tahsildar denkanikottai taluk, krishnagiri district. m.dhandapani j. dhk 06-04-2026

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06-04-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI WP No. 12624 of 2026 and WMP.No.13779 of 2026
1. Susilamma
2. Sunantha
3. Anitha
4. Santhamma
5. Lakshmidevi
6. Santhamma
7. Divya
8. Muniyamma Petitioner(s) Vs
1. the State Rep. by
Chief Secretary, Secretariat office, St. Cheorge Fort, Chennai-600 009 2.The District collector o/o.District collector, Krishnagiri District. 3.Sub Collector o/o.Sub Collector, Hosur. 4.Revenue Divisional officer o/o.Revenue Divisional Hosur. 5.The Tahsildar o/o.Tahsildar Denkanikottai Taluk, Krishnagiri District. Respondent(s) PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, directing the respondents to grant benefit under scheme of Kalaignar Magalir Urimai thogai pursuant to the petitioners representations dated 16.12.2025, 02.01.2026, 13.01.2026, 28.01.2026, 19.02.2026 and 20.02.2026 For Petitioner(s): Mr.R.Thirumoorthy For Respondent: Mr.J.Ravindran, AAG Assisted by Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader

ORDER

By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. WMP.No.13779 of 2026 has been filed to permit the petitioners to file single writ petitions. This petition is ordered on payment of single court fee.

3. This petition has been filed for a direction, directing the respondents to

grant benefit under scheme of Kalaignar Magalir Urimai thogai pursuant to the petitioners representations dated 16.12.2025, 02.01.2026, 13.01.2026, 28.01.2026, 19.02.2026 and 20.02.2026.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that petitioners belong to a family living

below the poverty line and the financial conditions of their family are extreme precarious and uncertain. It is the grievance of the petitioners that though they were fully eligible to benefit under the scheme of Kalaignar Magalir Urimai Thogai Scheme, they were not granted the benefits. Hence, they made several representations on 16.12.2025, 02.01.2026, 13.01.2026, 28.01.2026, 19.02.2026 and 20.02.2026 which are pending without consideration. Hence, this writ petition.

5. The learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the petitioners' representations will be considered within a period of twelve weeks. Accordingly, he prayed for orders.

6. Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record.

7. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, this Court without

going into the merits of the case directs the respondents to consider the petitioners representations dated 06.12.2025, 02.01.2026, 13.01.2026, 28.01.2026, 19.02.2026 and 20.02.2026 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order.

8. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. 06-04-2026 dhk Index:Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No To 1.The Chief Secretary State Secretariat office, St. Cheorge Fort, Chennai-600 009 2.The District collector o/o.District collector, Krishnagiri District. 3.The Sub Collector o/o.Sub Collector, Hosur. 4.Revenue Divisional officer o/o.Revenue Divisional Hosur. 5.The Tahsildar o/o.Tahsildar Denkanikottai Taluk, Krishnagiri District. M.DHANDAPANI J. dhk 06-04-2026

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2026 Same Parties Susilamma vs the State Rep. by Same Judge Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani