Case Note & Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent Tahsildar to implement an order dated 16.07.2024 passed by the first respondent Revenue Divisional Officer. The order arose from a representation made by the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents consented to the final disposal of the writ petition at the admission stage, considering the limited relief sought. The court observed that it would suffice to direct the second respondent to conduct an enquiry in furtherance of the order dated 16.07.2024 and pass final orders on the petitioner's application within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs. No substantial question of law was decided; the court merely provided a timeframe for action by the revenue authority.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Article 226, Constitution of India, 1950 - Direction to Public Authority - Petitioner sought implementation of an order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer - Court held that it would suffice to direct the Tahsildar to conduct an enquiry in furtherance of the said order and pass final orders on the petitioner's application within eight weeks - Held that such a direction meets the ends of justice (Paras 3-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing the second respondent to act in accordance with the order dated 16.07.2024 passed by the first respondent.
Final Decision
The writ petition was disposed of by directing the second respondent to conduct an enquiry in furtherance of the order dated 16.07.2024 and pass final orders on the petitioner's application within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. No costs were ordered.
Law Points
- Writ of Mandamus under Article 226
- implementation of administrative orders
- direction to public authority to conduct enquiry and pass orders
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (03) 326
Mr.S.Bageerathan, Mr.S.Kameswaran
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Thirumangalam, Madurai District. 2.The Tahsildar, Thirumangalam, 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.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought a direction to the second respondent (Tahsildar) to implement the order dated 16.07.2024 of the first respondent (Revenue Divisional Officer).
Filing Reason
Non-implementation of the order dated 16.07.2024 by the second respondent.
Issues
Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued to direct the second respondent to act on the order dated 16.07.2024.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner sought a limited relief of implementation of the earlier order.
The respondents, through the Government Advocate, consented to the final disposal at admission stage.
Ratio Decidendi
Where an administrative order has been passed but not implemented, a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the competent authority to enquire and pass final orders within a reasonable time.
Judgment Excerpts
Considering the limited relief that has been sought for, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Kameswaran, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal, even at the stage of admission.
it would suffice to direct the second respondent to conduct an enquiry in furtherance of the order dated 16.07.2024, on the file of the first respondent and pass final orders on the petitioner's application within a period of eight [8] weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Procedural History
The petitioner made a representation to the first respondent, who passed an order dated 16.07.2024. The second respondent did not implement the order. The petitioner filed the present writ petition. With consent, the matter was taken up for final disposal at the admission stage. The court disposed of the petition with directions.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India, 1950: Article 226
