Madras High Court
T.Sivasankaran vs The District Registrar ... on 25 August, 2023
W.P.No.25079 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 25.08.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.25079 of 2023 &
W.M.P.No.24506 of 2023
T.Sivasankaran ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Registrar (Administration)
Chennai – South,
Fanepet,
Nandanam,
Chennai – 600 035.
2.T.Rajendran ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the Impugned
Notice dated 22.06.2023, bearing No.20383/C2/2022, issued by the 1st
respondent and quash the same as illegal.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Udhayakumar
For Respondent 1 : Mr.G.Krishna Raja,
Additional Government Pleader
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.25079 of 2023
ORDER
The notice issued under section 77(A) of the Registration Act is under
challenge in this present writ petition.
2. No writ against the enquiry notice is entertainable under Article 226
of the Constitution of India. A writ against the enquiry notice is entertainable,
only if it is issued by an incompetent authority having no jurisdiction or
tainted with the allegations of malafides. Even in case where any one of the
party has got a good ground to defend their case, they are expected to submit
their defence before the authority, instead of filing a writ petition before the
High Court.
3. The powers conferred to the authorities under the Act must be
exercised in the manner known to law. The High Court should permit the
authorities to exercise their powers and therefore, entertaining the writ
petition at the initial stage or nibbing the bud is not desirable. Therefore, in
all circumstances, the persons who received an enquiry notice is expected to
place their defence including the judgements and the grounds relied on by
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.25079 of 2023
them before the authorities, enabling the authorities to take a decision in the
manner contemplated under the Act.
4. When the remedy is efficacious and when there is a possibility of
getting remedy from the competent authorities, filing a writ petition cannot
be encouraged and in such circumstances, the rights of the other parties are
prejudiced because the parties are deprived from adjudicating all other
grounds raised in the complaint. The High Court cannot quash the enquiry
notice on the only ground that section 77(A) cannot be applied
retrospectively. But the authority must be allowed to consider the defence to
be submitted by the parties and take a decision.
5. At the outset, the processes contemplated under the statutes must be
allowed to go on in the manner contemplated and an intermittent intervention
by the High Court in such circumstances is not desirable and may cause
prejudice to either of the parties. Thus, the petitioner is at liberty to submit
his defence including the grounds raised in the present writ petition and also
the judgments relied on or otherwise.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.25079 of 2023
6. With these observations, the writ petition stands dismissed. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
25.08.2023
nl/mkn-ii
Index : YeS
Speaking order
To
The District Registrar (Administration)
Chennai – South,
Fanepet,
Nandanam,
Chennai – 600 035.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.25079 of 2023
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
nl/mkn-ii
W.P.No.25079 of 2023
25.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
