Madras High Court
K.Sakthivel vs The District Collector on 12 October, 2023
W.P.(MD)No.3825 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 12.10.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.(MD)No.3825 of 2021
K.Sakthivel ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
O/o.The District Collectorate,
Madurai District.
2.The Assistant Director Rural Development Officer,
Village Panchayath ,
O/o.Assistant Director Rural Development Office,
Village Panchayath, Madurai District
3.The Block Development Officer
Mellur Panchayath Union,
Melur, Madurai.
4.The President
Narasingampatti Panchayath, Mellur,
Panchayath Union, Madurai. ...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the Respondent No.1
From passing any order on the application of the respondent No.3 for
change in powers conferred to Vice President, Narasingampatti
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.3825 of 2021
Pamchayath, Mellur Panchayath Union, without hearing the petitioner
within the time period stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Rajasekar
For R-1 to R-4 : Mr.A.K.Manikkam,
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for the issue of writ of
mandamus forbearing the first respondent from passing any order on the
application submitted by the third respondent seeking for withdrawing the
cheque signing powers of the Vice President.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he is the Vice President of
the Narasingam Panchayat. The petitioner had made various
representations to respondent Nos.1 to 3 by complaining the alleged
irregularities committed by the fourth respondent, who is the President of
the Panchayat. In view of the same, the fourth respondent had developed
an ill will against the petitioner. The fourth respondent was forcing the
petitioner to sign a few cheques which were not borne out by genuine
receipts. The petitioner was not willing to became a party to the illegal
transactions. It is under these circumstances, the fourth respondent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.3825 of 2021
attempted to bring a resolution to withdraw the cheque signing powers of
the petitioner and to assign that power in favour of one A.Vasantha.
Immediately, after this action was taken, the petitioner made a detailed
representation to the respondents to stop the fourth respondent from
proceeding further to pass such a resolution against the petitioner. Since
the same was not considered, the present Writ Petition has been filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and
the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted
that during the pendency of this writ petition, the Resolution was not
brought forth and it was not passed by the Panchayat. However, the fourth
respondent has taken all steps to somehow withdraw the cheque signing
powers of the Vice President. The learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner relied upon the Judgment of this Court in the case of
T.Kumaravelu Vs. the Chief Executive officer / Collector of Cuddalore
District and others reported in 2004-3-L.W.171 and the Judgment of this
Court in the case of Pugazhendran, President, Brammapuram, Village
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.3825 of 2021
Panchayat, Katpadi Panchayat Union, Katpadi Taluk, Vellore District
Vs. B.G.Balu, and others reported in 2005 (1) CTC 545 and submitted that
the cheque signing powers of the Vice President cannot be withdrawn on
flimsy grounds and it requires mandatory compliance of the procedure that
has been prescribed under the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act, 1994.
5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstance of the
case and the nature of grievance that has been expressed by the petitioner,
it will be more appropriate to direct the first respondent to deal with the
representation made by the petitioner on 23.01.2021 and take a decision in
accordance with law. The first respondent has to necessarily deal with this
representation, since the resolution itself can be passed only with the prior
approval of the first respondent. Therefore, if the first respondent is
appraised of happenings in the Panchayat, it will be more easier for the
first respondent to deal with the situation and take an appropriate decision
in this regard. The first respondent shall take a decision in this regard
within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.3825 of 2021
6. This Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions.
No costs.
12.10.2023
NCC:yes/no
Index:yes/no
Internet:yes/no
tsg
To
1.The District Collector,
O/o.The District Collectorate,
Madurai District.
2.The Assistant Director Rural Development Officer,
Village Panchayath ,
O/o.Assistant Director Rural Development Office,
Village Panchayath, Madurai District
3.The Block Development Officer
Mellur Panchayath Union,
Melur, Madurai.
4.The President
Narasingampatti Panchayath, Mellur,
Panchayath Union, Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.3825 of 2021
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J
tsg
W.P.(MD)No.3825 of 2021
12.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
