P. Mohamed Sherif vs The Government Of Tamilnadu
2026 Latest Caselaw 2651 Mad

Madras High Court

P. Mohamed Sherif vs The Government Of Tamilnadu on 20 May, 2026

Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy

Bench: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy

                                                                   W.A.(MD) No.801 of 2026


                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                            DATED : 20.05.2026

                                                   CORAM:

                      THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
                                              and
                             THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA

                                           W.A(MD)No.801 of 2026
                                                  and
                                          CMP(MD)No.6622 of 2026


                   P.Mohamed Sherif                                            ... Petitioner

                                                       Vs.

                   1.The Government of Tamil Nadu
                   Represented by its Secretary
                   Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department
                   Secretariat,
                   Chennai.

                   2.The Director
                   Vigilance and Anti Corruption
                   Chennai.

                   3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police
                   Vigilance and Anti Corruption
                   Sivagangai.

                   4.The Assistant Director of Village Panchayat
                   Sivagangai District
                   Sivagangai.

                   ____________
                   Page 1 of 6




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                         W.A.(MD) No.801 of 2026



                   5.The Inspector
                   Vigilance and Anti Corruption
                   Sivagangai.

                   6.Revathi
                   The President of Kazhukerkadai Panchayat (Incharge)
                   Kazhukerkadai Village
                   Thirupuvanam Taluk
                   Sivagangai District.                                            ...Respondents

                   PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters of Patent Appeal,
                   against the order dated 01.04.2026 made in W.P(MD)No.24891 of 2024
                   passed by this Court.


                                  For Petitioner     : Mr.J.Anandkumar
                                  For Respondents    : Mr.R.Gandhiraj - for R1, R4
                                                         Special Government Pleader
                                                         Mr.T.Senthil Kumar - for R3, R5
                                                         Additional Public Prosecutor


                                                    JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by D.Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.)

This writ appeal is listed under the caption “For

maintainability”.

____________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2. The maintainability is because the writ petition is criminal in

nature. The prayer made in the writ petition is for a mandamus directing the

3rd and 5th respondents in the writ petition, namely the Deputy

Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Sivagangai and

the Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Sivagangai to take

action on the petitioner's representation dated 01.10.2024.

3. A perusal of the representation dated 01.10.2024, it is

addressed to the third respondent in the writ petition. It claims that the

President of the Village Panchayat has misappropriated the funds and

therefore, request for registering of a case and investigating into the same.

4. The prayer of the petitioner if allowed will only result in

registration of a criminal case and the prosecution of the concerned

individuals and therefore, there can be no doubt whatsoever that the matter

is criminal in nature. It has already been held in detail by this Court that the

Court has to consider in pith and substance as to the subject matter in

question and thereafter decide the issue.

____________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

5. Useful reference in this regard can be made to the judgment

of the Division Bench in W.A(MD)SR.No.48660 of 2025 (Ganesan Vs.

Franklin Roosevelt and Others). The Division Bench after taking note of

the earlier Division Bench judgment in Deepa vs. Vijayalakshmi and

Others, whereunder the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in

Ram Kishan Fauji vs. State of Haryana and Others (2017 (5) SCC 533)

and the other judgments were considered in detail and the issue was

considered.

6. By considering the same, since in effect the relief prayed for

is relating to criminal prosecution, the intra Court appeal cannot be

entertained and accordingly, the writ appeal stands rejected, however, with

the liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum as against the

order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

                                                                  (D.B.C., J.)       (R.P., J.)
                                                                            20.05.2026
                   Index : Yes /No
                   NCC : Yes /No
                   rm

                   ____________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

To

1.The Government of Tamil Nadu Represented by its Secretary Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department Secretariat, Chennai.

2.The Director Vigilance and Anti Corruption Chennai.

3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police Vigilance and Anti Corruption Sivagangai.

4.The Assistant Director of Village Panchayat Sivagangai District Sivagangai.

5.The Inspector Vigilance and Anti Corruption Sivagangai.

____________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

and R.POORNIMA, J.

rm

Order made in

and

20.05.2026

____________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis