Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Rajendran vs The District Collector on 3 April, 2017

Bench: T.S.Sivagnanam, P.Velmurugan

        

 

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT               

DATED: 03.04.2017  

CORAM   

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM            
and 
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN             


W.P.(MD) No.9589 of 2013  
and 
M.P.(MD) Nos.1 and 2 of 2013 

Rajendran                                                               ...  Petitioner


-vs-

1.The District Collector
   Dindigul District
   Dindigul

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer
   Dindigul, Dindigul District

3.The Tahsildar
   Athur Taluk
   Dindigul District

4.Ananthi                                                               ...  Respondents

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to
issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the community
certificate issued by the third respondent in his proceedings made in
R.Dis.No.6376/2011, dated 04.08.2011, in favour of the fourth respondent and
quash the same. 

!For Petitioner         :       Mr.V.Kannan  

For Respondents :       Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan           
                          Spl. Govt. Pleader for R1 to R3
                        Mr.J.Lawrance for R4    


:ORDER  

[Order of the Court by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.] Heard Mr.V.Kannan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.J.Lawrance, learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent and perused the materials produced.

2. The petitioner is the husband of the fourth respondent. It appears that there is a matrimonial discord between them. The petitioner has sued the fourth respondent for divorce and the fourth respondent has initiated criminal proceedings under Section 498(A) I.P.C., against the petitioner.

3. In this writ petition, the petitioner wants his representations, dated 20.05.2013, given to the respondents 2 and 3, to be considered and the community certificate issued to his wife / fourth respondent be cancelled.

4. We find that the purpose for which this writ petition has been filed is as a collateral purpose and different motive presumably with a view to make it as a counter-blast to the criminal proceedings initiated by the fourth respondent. Therefore, we are not inclined to issue any positive direction to the respondents. However, if at all any false information are provided by the fourth respondent while obtaining the community certificate, then it will always open to the competent authority to cause verification of the community certificate in accordance with law.

5. The writ petition is disposed of with the above observations. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

To

1.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

3.The Tahsildar, Athur Taluk, Dindigul District..