Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Veeranathan, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, challenging a notice dated 11.12.2024 issued by the Executive Officer, Special Grade Town Panchayat, Courtalam, Tenkasi District. The impugned notice was a show cause notice calling upon the petitioner to explain why further action should not be taken against him regarding construction of a boundary wall in Survey No.462/1, extent 72 cents, at Courtalam Town Panchayat. The petitioner sought a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the notice and to direct the respondent not to intervene in the construction. The court, by consent of both sides, took up the writ petition for final disposal at the admission stage. The court observed that it is a settled proposition of law that a writ court exercising power under Article 226 will not interfere with a show cause notice except in a few exceptions, and the grounds raised in the petition did not fall under any of those exceptions. Therefore, the writ petition was not maintainable. However, on a sympathetic view, the court granted liberty to the petitioner to submit his reply to the impugned notice within seven days from receipt of the order. The respondent was directed to consider the reply on its own merits and take further proceedings in accordance with law, after extending due opportunity to the petitioner and any other interested persons. The writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Show Cause Notice - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - The court held that it will not ordinarily interfere with a show cause notice under Article 226 except in exceptional circumstances. The petitioner's grounds did not fall within any exception. However, the court granted liberty to the petitioner to submit a reply within seven days, and directed the respondent to consider it on merits after affording due opportunity. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ petition challenging a show cause notice is maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable. However, the petitioner was granted liberty to submit a reply to the impugned notice within seven days from receipt of the order. The respondent was directed to consider the reply on merits and take further proceedings in accordance with law after affording due opportunity. No order as to costs. Connected miscellaneous petition closed.
Law Points
- Show cause notice not ordinarily interfered with under Article 226
- Exceptions to interference with show cause notice
- Liberty to submit explanation
