Madras High Court
R.Chandrasekar vs The Inspector General Of ... on 27 April, 2022
W.A(MD)No.384 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 27.04.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE PARESH UPADHYAY
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
W.A(MD)No. 384 of 2022
and C.M.P.(MD) No. 3891 of 2022
R.Chandrasekar .. Appellant
Vs
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
O/o. The Inspector General of Registration,
No.100, Santhome High Road,
Chennai – 600 028.
2.The District Registrar (Administration),
Additional Incharge,
Pattukottai,
Thanjavur District. .. Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent
against the order dated 11.02.2022 made in W.P.(MD) No. 2869 of
2022.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Ajmalkhan,
Senior Counsel for
M/s.Ajmal Associates
For Respondents : Mr.Veera Kathiravan,
Additional Advocate General,
assisted by
Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandran,
Special Government Pleader.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/5
W.A(MD)No.384 of 2022
JUDGMENT
[Delivered by PARESH UPADHYAY, J.]
Challenge in this appeal is made to the order dated 11
February 2022 recorded on W.P(MD) No.2869 of 2022. This appeal
is by the writ petitioner.
2. Mr.M.Ajmal Khan, learned Senior Advocate for the
petitioner has, at the outset, fairly submitted that, the grievance of
the appellant is limited to the observations contained in para:9 of
the order under challenge. It is submitted that, so far the dismissal
of the writ petition is concerned, that part is not challenged in this
appeal.
3. For this limited purpose, we have heard Mr.M.Ajmal
Khan, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner and Mr.Veera
Kathiravan, learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by
Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandran, learned Additional Government Pleader for
the authorities.
4. The Government can not have any say on this appeal,
so far the dismissal of the writ petition stands as it is. Keeping this
in view, we have examined the necessity of observations in para:9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.384 of 2022
of the order under challenge vis-a-vis the prayer sought in the writ
petition. On conjoint consideration of this, we find that, while
deciding the writ petition which has ultimately culminated in
dismissal thereof, the observations in para:9 were not required. This
is more so, when the writ petitioner is to attain the age of
superannuation in the month of June 2022. We also note that, as an
off shoot of the said para:9, one person had sent complaint to this
Court, which had culminated in suo motu W.P(MD) No.5237 of 2022
and the said petition was dismissed by this Court vide order darted
05 April 2022.
5. Considering the totality, we find that, no interference is
required in the order dated 11 February 2022 so far it rejects the
writ petition, however the said order is modified by expunging para:
9 thereof.
6. This appeal is disposed of in above terms. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions would not survive.
(P.U., J) (R.V., J)
27.04.2022
Index : No
pkn/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.384 of 2022
To:-
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
O/o. The Inspector General of Registration,
No.100, Santhome High Road,
Chennai – 600 028.
2.The District Registrar (Administration),
Additional Incharge,
Pattukottai,
Thanjavur District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.384 of 2022
PARESH UPADHYAY, J.
and
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.
pkn
W.A(MD)No.384 of 2022
27.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
