Jayakumar vs the District Collector

Jayakumar vs The District Collector

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Jun 26, 2025

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1871164

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/1871164
Court: Chennai Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice C.Kumarappan
Decided On: Jun 26, 2025
Case Number: WP/11462/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jayakumar

Respondent

The District Collector

Excerpt

.....which statement was strongly objected by the learned additional government pleader and they also produced the explanation given by the delinquent on 14.03.2025 to the enquiry report which is referred to asreference no.12 in the impugned order. 4.in such view of the matter, this court neither find violation of fundamental right nor the natural justice nor bias. as rightly contended by the learned additional government pleader, as there is appeal remedy available to the petitioner, the writ petition is not maintainable.5.the writ petition is dismissed. however, the petitioner is granted liberty to approach the appellate authority within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. on filing of such appeal, the appellate authority is directed to dispose of the same upon its own merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. no costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.prinote: registry is directed to return the original impugned orderto the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner after getting necessary acknowledgement. index: yes/ no speaking order: yes/ no ncc: yes/ noc.kumarappan,j.pri to dharmapuri district. and w.m.p.nos.12941 and 12943 of 2025

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN And W.M.P.Nos.12941 and 12943 of 2025 Jayakumar ... Petitioner Vs. Dharmapuri District. ... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records relating to the order of the third respondent made in Na.Ka.No.710/2023/E2 dated 14.03.2025 and quash the same and direct the respondents to For Petitioner : Mr.M.Muthappan For Respondents : Mr.R.U.Dinesh Kumar for R1 and R2 Additional Government Pleader Ms.E.Ranganayaki for R3

ORDER

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the

order of the third respondent made in Na.Ka.No.710/2023/E2 dated

14.03.2025 and quash the same and direct the respondents to 2.According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner though they have got alternative remedy, since because the procedure had not been followed, they are entitled to file writ petition.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that they have not been furnished with enquiry report, which statement was strongly objected by the learned Additional Government Pleader and they also produced the explanation given by the delinquent on 14.03.2025 to the enquiry report which is referred to as

reference no.12 in the impugned order. 4.In such view of the matter, this Court neither find violation of fundamental right nor the natural justice nor bias. As rightly contended by the learned Additional Government Pleader, as there is appeal remedy available to the petitioner, the writ petition is not maintainable.

5.The writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is granted liberty to approach the appellate Authority within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On filing of such appeal, the appellate Authority is directed to dispose of the same upon its own merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

pri

Note: Registry is directed to return the original impugned order

to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner after getting necessary acknowledgement. Index: Yes/ No Speaking Order: Yes/ No NCC: Yes/ No

C.KUMARAPPAN,J.

pri To Dharmapuri District. And W.M.P.Nos.12941 and 12943 of 2025

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2025 Same Parties Jayakumar vs The District Collector Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice C.Kumarappan