Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, S. Kodeeswaran, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court seeking a writ of mandamus. The petitioner prayed for a direction to respondents 1 to 4 (District Collector, Superintendent of Police, Tahsildar, and Inspector of Police of Sivagangai District) to consider his representation dated 07.11.2024. The representation sought to prevent respondents 5 to 7 from demolishing the original structure of Arulmighu Sri Andara Nachiyamman Temple located at Kottaiyiruppu, Thirupathur Taluk, Sivagangai District, and to direct the fourth respondent to provide adequate police protection to the temple. The petitioner had given the representation to the official respondents on 07.11.2024, but it was not considered, leading to the filing of the writ petition. The court observed that whenever a representation is made to a statutory authority, there is a duty cast upon it to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders without indefinite delay. Non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty, justifying the court's intervention under Article 226. Accordingly, the court directed respondents 1 to 4 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 07.11.2024 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, respondents 5 to 7, and all other interested persons, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The court clarified that it had not expressed any views on the merits of the matter and that the respondents were free to consider the representation on its own merits. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Duty of Statutory Authority to Consider Representation - Non-consideration of representation by statutory authority amounts to dereliction of duty - Court directed respondents 1 to 4 to consider petitioner's representation dated 07.11.2024 on its own merits after hearing all interested parties within three months - Held that Article 226 of the Constitution of India empowers the court to direct consideration of representation (Paras 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the court should direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation regarding prevention of demolition of a temple structure.
Final Decision
The court directed respondents 1 to 4 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 07.11.2024 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, respondents 5 to 7, and all other interested persons, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Duty of statutory authority to consider representation
- Non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty
- Article 226 power to direct consideration
