Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

M.Sekar Vs The District Manager

M.Sekar vs The District Manager

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jul 01, 2026
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1661179

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP(MD)/18126/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

M.Sekar

Respondent

The District Manager

Excerpt

.....came up for consideration on 29.06.2026, thiscourt took note of the said contention, directed the learned standing counsel, mr.h.arumugam, to obtain instructions specifically as to whether the petitioner had attended duty on 17.05.2026.5. today, when the matter is taken up for further consideration, mr.h.arumugam, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent corporation, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner had not attended duty on 17.05.2026.6. from the above, it is evident that the petitioner had not attendedduty on 17.05.2026 and, therefore, the question of the petitioner committing any misconduct on that day so as to sustain the impugned proceedings does not arise.7. therefore, it is evident that the impugned proceeding was issuedwithout application of mind and without taking note of the factual position. consequently, the impugned proceedings cannot be sustained. accordingly, the impugned order passed by the respondent in no.na.ka.no.a-1/8152/2026, dated 17.05.2026, is hereby quashed.8. in view of the above, this writ petition is allowed. there shall be no order as to costs. consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 01.07.2026 index :yes / no internet :yes / no ncc :yes / no nsr to: the district manager, tamil nadu state marketing corporation limited, nanjikottai road, thanjavur district - 613 006.mummineni sudheer kumar, j.nsrorder made in01.07.2026

Full Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.07.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.13428 and 13431 of 2026 M.Sekar ... Petitioner vs. The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, Nanjikottai Road, Thanjavur District - 613 006. ... Respondent PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the Respondent File No.Na.Ka.No.A-1/8152/2026, dated 17.05.2026 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Murali For Respondents : Mr.H.Arumugam *****

ORDER

Heard Mr.R.Murali for the Petitioner and Mr.H.Arumugam for the Respondent.

2. This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to quash the proceedings passed by the respondent in No.Na.Ka.No.A-1/8152/2026, dated 17.05.2026.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the

impugned proceedings dated 17.05.2026 were issued placing the petitioner, along with two other employees, under suspension by the respondent Corporation on the allegation that they had sold liquor at a price higher than the MRP on 17.05.2026. The principal ground of challenge to the impugned proceedings is that the petitioner had not attended duty on 17.05.2026 and, therefore, the question of the petitioner having committed the alleged misconduct does not arise.

4. When this matter came up for consideration on 29.06.2026, this

Court took note of the said contention, directed the learned Standing Counsel, Mr.H.Arumugam, to obtain instructions specifically as to whether the petitioner had attended duty on 17.05.2026.

5. Today, when the matter is taken up for further consideration, Mr.H.Arumugam, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner had not attended duty on 17.05.2026.

6. From the above, it is evident that the petitioner had not attended

duty on 17.05.2026 and, therefore, the question of the petitioner committing any misconduct on that day so as to sustain the impugned proceedings does not arise.

7. Therefore, it is evident that the impugned proceeding was issued

without application of mind and without taking note of the factual position. Consequently, the impugned proceedings cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the respondent in No.Na.Ka.No.A-1/8152/2026, dated 17.05.2026, is hereby quashed.

8. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 01.07.2026 Index :Yes / No Internet :Yes / No NCC :Yes / No Nsr To: The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, Nanjikottai Road, Thanjavur District - 613 006.

MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.

Nsr

Order made in

01.07.2026

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial