Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, K. Mani, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct the District Collector (respondent 1) and the Executive Officer of Aralvaimozhi Town Panchayat (respondent 4) to take action against the fifth respondent, who was operating a weighbridge on National Highway 944 (Nagercoil–Kavalkinaru) within the Aralvaimozhi Town Panchayat area. The petitioner had submitted a representation to the authorities on 20.11.2022 regarding the alleged unauthorized operation, but the representation was not considered. The court observed that whenever a representation is made to a statutory authority, there is a duty to consider it on its merits and pass appropriate orders; failure to do so amounts to dereliction of duty. Accordingly, the court directed respondents 1 and 4 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.11.2022, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, the fifth respondent, and all other interested persons, and to pass orders in accordance with law within 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. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Duty of Statutory Authority - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Whenever a representation is made to a statutory authority, there is a duty cast upon him to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders, instead of keeping it pending indefinitely. Non-consideration amounts to dereliction of duty, justifying invocation of extraordinary powers under Article 226. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondents 1 & 4 are obligated to consider the petitioner's representation regarding the operation of a weighbridge on National Highway 944.
Final Decision
The court directed respondents 1 & 4 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.11.2022 on its merits, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, the fifth respondent, and all other interested persons, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within 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
- Writ of Mandamus under Article 226
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 389
M.S.Ramesh, A.D.Maria Clete
For Petitioner: Mr.N.Pragalathan; For Respondents 1 to 4: Mr.P.Thilak Kumar, Government Pleader
1. The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil; 2. The Divisional Engineer, National Highways, Nagercoil; 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Labour (Enforcement), The Inspecting Authority, Legal Metrology Officer, Government of Tamil Nadu; 4. The Executive Officer, Aralvaimozhi Town Panchayat; 5. The Proprietor, Royal Weighbridge
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus.
Remedy Sought
Direction to respondents 1 & 4 to take necessary action against the fifth respondent for operating a weighbridge on National Highway 944.
Filing Reason
The petitioner's representation dated 20.11.2022 regarding the weighbridge operation was not considered by the authorities.
Issues
Whether the respondents 1 & 4 are obligated to consider the petitioner's representation regarding the operation of a weighbridge on National Highway 944.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner submitted a representation on 20.11.2022 which was not considered.
The respondents did not file any counter or raise objections.
Ratio Decidendi
Whenever a representation is made to a statutory authority, there is a duty cast upon him to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. Non-consideration of the representation by the statutory authority would amount to dereliction of duty, and the court is justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.
Judgment Excerpts
It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon him to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely.
non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court. By consent of both sides, the petition was taken up for final disposal at the admission stage. The court dispensed with notice to the private respondent as it was directing the authorities to consider the representation. The court disposed of the petition with directions.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
