Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, sister of a convict, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus directing the prison authorities to grant ordinary leave for 21 days to her brother, Kannan (C.P.No.6099), based on her representation dated 4.2.2025. The petition was filed as the representation had not been considered. During the pendency of the writ petition, the authorities considered the representation and, by proceedings dated 20.3.2025, granted ordinary leave for 21 days with escort. At the hearing, the Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the representation had been positively considered and leave granted with escort. The petitioner's counsel argued that the convict's house was small and requested that the escort be dispensed with. The court, however, found it not appropriate to dispense with the escort. Since the representation had already been disposed of and the relief of ordinary leave granted, albeit with escort, the court held that nothing survived for further adjudication and dismissed the writ petition. The court thus declined to issue any further directions and the petition was dismissed as infructuous.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Infructuous Petition - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 226 - The writ petition sought a direction to consider the representation for ordinary leave of a convict. The authorities had already granted ordinary leave with escort before the hearing. The court held that nothing survived for adjudication and dismissed the petition. The request to dispense with escort was not acceded to as it was not appropriate. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ petition seeking mandamus to consider representation for ordinary leave survives after the representation was considered and leave granted with escort; and whether the escort condition can be dispensed with.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed as nothing survives for adjudication; the representation was already considered and ordinary leave with escort granted. The court refused to dispense with the escort condition.
Law Points
- Writ of Mandamus
- Article 226 of Constitution
- infructuous petition
- ordinary leave
- escort condition
- disposal of representation
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (03) 237
Dr. Justice G. Jayachandran, Justice R. Poornima
Dr. Lakshmi Prasanna, Mr. A. Thiruvdi Kumar
1.The Deputy Inspector General of Prison, Madurai Range; 2.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Jail, Madurai; 3.The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District
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 to direct prison authorities to consider and grant ordinary leave to the petitioner's brother, a convict.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought a direction to the respondents to grant ordinary leave for 21 days to her brother Kannan, considering her representation dated 4.2.2025.
Filing Reason
The representation dated 4.2.2025 for ordinary leave had not been considered, prompting the filing of the writ petition.
Issues
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued when the representation has already been considered and relief granted.
Whether the escort condition for the ordinary leave should be dispensed with due to the small size of the convict's house.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel argued that the representation dated 4.2.2025 was not considered and sought ordinary leave without escort as the house is small, making it difficult to accommodate the escort.
Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the representation was considered and ordinary leave for 21 days with escort was granted vide proceedings dated 20.3.2025.
Ratio Decidendi
A writ petition seeking mandamus to consider a representation becomes infructuous if the representation is considered and relief granted during pendency; the court's refusal to dispense with escort for a convict's leave is a matter of discretion based on facts.
Judgment Excerpts
the representation of the Petitioner was positively considered and vide proceedings, dated 20.3.2025 and ordinary leave for 21 days with escort has been granted.
This Court finds that it is not appropriate to dispense with the escort.
nothing survives for further adjudication in this Writ Petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking mandamus to consider a representation dated 4.2.2025 for ordinary leave. During pendency, the authorities considered the representation and granted ordinary leave with escort on 20.3.2025. At the hearing, the Additional Public Prosecutor informed the court of the grant. The petitioner's counsel sought leave without escort. The court dismissed the petition on 24.3.2025.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India, 1950: Article 226
