Lakshmikanthan M v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

ORDER Heard Mr.K.Pragadesh Ganapathy learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Parthiban, learned counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu, for the respondents.

2.This writ petition is disposed of at the time of admission after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

3.The petitioner is before this Court against the impugned order rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for operating as a money lender under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Money Lenders Act, 1957.

4.The specific case of the petitioner is that although the petitioner has made adequate declarations, the application has been rejected without any reasonings.

5.On a specific query as to whether any case is pending as against the petitioner, the learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention to the police verification regarding pendency of about 5 cases. It is submitted that out of 5 cases, 3 cases were disposed of and 2 cases are pending trial.

6.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner will be satisfied if liberty is granted to the petitioner to challenge the order impugned before the appellate authority.

7.The learned counsel for the respondents would submit that if an appropriate appeal is filed before the appellate authority within the time to be specified by this Court, the appellate authority will dispose of the same in accordance with law, notwithstanding the fact that the time for filing the appeal has already expired.

8.Considering the fact that the impugned order has been passed without hearing the petitioner, I am inclined to grant liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the appellate authority within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On filing of such an appeal, the appellate authority shall dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law without reference to limitation.

9.The Writ Petition stands disposed of with such liberty. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Index : Yes / No

29.06.2026 Internet : Yes / No mm To

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer Tirunelveli Tirunelveli District.

2.The Tashidhar Tirunelveli Taluk Tirunelveli District.

C.SARAVANAN, J.

mm

29.06.2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.06.2026 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN and WMP(MD) No.13175 of 2026 M.Lakshmikanthan ... Petitioner /vs./ 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer Tirunelveli Tirunelveli District. 2.The Tashidhar Tirunelveli Taluk Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the impugned rejecting order in application TN-1920250603103 dated 03.06.2025 pertaining to rejecting the money lender license by the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to issue money lender license to the petitioner with a stipulated time fixed by this court. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Pragadesh Ganapathy For Respondents : Mr.R.Parthiban counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu