C.Dhanabakkiyam v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

ORDER [made by M.SUNDAR, J.] Captioned main 'writ petition' [hereinafter 'WP' for the sake of brevity] has been filed with a prayer for a writ of certiorari qua a 'enquiry notice (tprhuiz miHg;ghiz) dated 05.07.2024 bearing reference e.f//2748/2024/m2 issued by R1 (Revenue Divisional Officer)' which shall hereinafter be referred to as 'impugned notice' for the sake of convenience and clarity.

¶2In the impugned notice, lone writ petitioner before us is noticee no.7. Captioned WP has been filed in this Court on

15.07.2024.

¶3When the captioned WP was listed before this Court on

26.07.2024 in the Admission Board, the following proceedings/order came to be made: Page Nos.2/28

¶4Thereafter, there was another listing on 02.08.2024 and in that listing, the following proceedings/order came to be made: Page Nos.3/28

¶5Today, Ms. V. Srimathi, learned counsel on record for writ petitioner, is before us and learned counsel, adverting to earlier proceedings dated 26.07.2024, submits that an additional typed set of papers dated 26.07.2024 has since been filed and the same is before us. This additional typed set of papers dated 26.07.2024 consists of only one document and that is an order dated 12.07.2024 bearing reference e.f//2748/2024/m2 (hereinafter 'said order' for the sake of convenience and clarity) made by R1. Page Nos.4/28

¶6Learned counsel submits that the impugned notice of R1 has culminated in the said order of R1. This submission is recorded.

¶7Learned counsel submitted that simultaneous with said notice, a caveat has been lodged but orders have been made.

¶8Issue notice to respondents.

¶9Mr. K. Suresh, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice for RR 1 to 3 and Mr. T.K. Saravanan, learned Additional Government Pleader, accepts notice for R4. Learned State counsel for R4 submits, on instructions, that said order was assailed by three individuals, viz., Rukmani, T.S. Kumar and C. Dhanapal vide W.P.No.22811 of 2024 along with W.M.P. Nos.24846, 24847 and 24849 of 2024 thereat, the same came to be disposed of (after full contest) by a Division Bench to which one of us (M. SUNDAR, J.) was a party. Learned State counsel has placed before us this order dated

18.12.2024 made in W.P. No.22811 of 2024 and W.M.P. Nos.24846, 24847 and 24849 of 2024 thereat and the same reads as follows: Page Nos.5/28 Page Nos.6/28 Page Nos.7/28 Page Nos.8/28 Page Nos.9/28 Page Nos.10/28 Page Nos.11/28 Page Nos.12/28 Page Nos.13/28 Page Nos.14/28 Page Nos.15/28 Page Nos.16/28 Page Nos.17/28 Page Nos.18/28 Page Nos.19/28 Page Nos.20/28 Page Nos.21/28 Page Nos.22/28 Page Nos.23/28

¶10What is of greater significance is, learned State counsel submits that aforereferred 18.12.2024 order of the Division Bench of this Court was carried to Hon'ble Supreme Court by the writ petitioners thereat, viz., Rukmani and 2 others in and by way of S.L.P.

(C) No.8346 of 2025 and the same came to be withdrawn on

22.05.2025. Saying so, learned State counsel has produced a copy of the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 22.05.2025 and a scanned reproduction of the same is as follows: Page Nos.24/28 Page Nos.25/28

¶11A careful perusal of the aforementioned order brings to light that the aforereferred special leave petition is dismissed and Hon'ble Supreme Court has recorded the apology tendered by the District Collector.

¶12As there is no disputation or contestation before us and it is the stated position of learned counsel for writ petitioner that impugned notice, i.e., notice impugned in captioned WP, has Page Nos.26/28 culminated in said order which was unsuccessfully challenged by three individuals before Hon'ble Supreme Court and the proceedings in Hon'ble Supreme Court have been withdrawn, we refrain from making any legal drill on merits in the captioned WP as a matter of judicial discipline in the hierarchy of Courts. For the purpose of completion of facts, we deem it appropriate to record that the counsel on record in earlier writ petition being W.P.No.22811 of 2024 and W.M.P.Nos.24846, 24847 and 24849 of 2024 thereat and counsel on record in the captioned main WP is the same.

¶13As already alluded to supra, since challenge to said order has been dismissed by a judicial order dated 18.12.2024 and even challenge to the same before Hon'ble Supreme Court has been withdrawn, we deem it appropriate to write that captioned WP will now stand dismissed. Consequently, captioned writ miscellaneous petition thereat is disposed of as closed. There shall be no order as to costs. (M.S., J.) (H.C., J.)

12.06.2025 cad Page Nos.27/28

M.SUNDAR, J. and

HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J. cad To

¶1The Revenue Divisional Officer 8PQF+JC6, CSI Institutions Campus Brough Road, Erode Tamil Nadu 638 001

¶2The District Collector State Highway 96, Opp. District Court Tamil Nadu 638 011

¶3The Tahsildar New No.12, Old No.360 Erode Main Road, Panneer Silvam Park Erode, Tamil Nadu 638 001

¶4The Village Administrative Officer Erode

12.06.2025 Page Nos.28/28

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 12.06.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR W.P.No.20719 of 2024 and W.M.P.No.22668 of 2024 C. Dhanabakkiyam Petitioner vs. 1. The Revenue Divisional Officer 8PQF+JC6, CSI Institutions Campus Brough Road, Erode Tamil Nadu 638 001 2. The District Collector State Highway 96 Opp. District Court Tamil Nadu 638 011 3. The Tahsildar New No.12, Old No.360 Erode Main Road, Panneer Selvam Park Erode, Tamil Nadu 638 001 4. The Village Administrative Officer Erode Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari calling for the records on the file of the 1st respondent in proceedings No.Na.Ka.2748/2024/A2 dated 05.07.2024 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same as illegal, incompetent and without jurisdiction. Page Nos.1/28 For petitioner Ms. V. Srimathi For RR 1 to 3 Mr. K. Suresh Govt. Advocate For R4 Mr. T.K. Saravanan Addl. Govt. Pelader