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 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

R.Rajendran vs The Secretary To The Government on 11 September, 2025

Author: M.Dhandapani

Bench: M.Dhandapani

                                                                                                W.P.No.34575 of 2025

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                    DATED : 11.09.2025

                                                                CORAM

                                    THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

                                                  W.P.No.34575 of 2025

                     R.RAJENDRAN                                                           ... Petitioner
                                                                    Vs.

                     1     THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
                           GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU,
                           SECRETARIAT,
                           FORT ST.GEORGE,
                           CHENNAI – 600 002.

                     2     THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
                           MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE,
                           GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU,
                           SECRETARIAT,
                           FORT ST.GEORGE,
                           CHENNAI – 600 002.

                     3     THE DEAN,
                           KILPAUK MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL,
                           KILPAUK,
                           CHENNAI – 600 010.                  ... Respondents

                     Prayer:

                                  Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
                     praying to be pleased to consider the representation given by the
                     petitioner in 2019 and they issue a direction, more particularly a writ,
                     in the nature of mandamus, to direct the respondents to issue
                     compensation for the loss of health for the petitioner now suffering for
                     the past 19 years.

                     1/4




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis                  ( Uploaded on: 12/09/2025 07:48:27 pm )
                                                                                                  W.P.No.34575 of 2025




                                        For Petitioner  : Mr.R.Harinath
                                        For Respondents : Mr.E.Sundaram
                                                          Government Advocate

                                                         ORDER

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the representation given by the petitioner in 2019 and to further direct the respondents to issue compensation for the loss of health for the petitioner now suffering for the past 19 years.

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that during the year 2005, the petitioner went to K.M.C.Government Hospital in Chennai for getting treatment for ear pain. At that time, a counsellor who was propagating advertisement for vasectomy forced the petitioner to do vasectomy surgery. After the surgery, the petitioner was frequently urinating with less amount of urine output and after 2007, it got worse and hence the petitioner went to K.M.C. Hospital and a second surgery for vasectomy correction was done in the year 2008. Even thereafter, the petitioner's health did not improve and hence the petitioner made representation to the respondents seeking compensation, however, there is no response.

2/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/09/2025 07:48:27 pm ) W.P.No.34575 of 2025

3.Heard the arguments advanced on either side and perused the materials available on record.

4.Perusal of records reveal that the petitioner himself claim that he performed vasectomy surgery during the years 2005 and 2008.

The petitioner claim that after 2008, his health worsened and made frequent visit to hospital and till date he has not recovered, thereby, he made representation claiming compensation. This Court is unable to understand the medical negligence and there is no proof filed before this Court to ascertain whether there is any medical negligence. In the absence of any proof, this Court cannot issue any direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation. Further, the petitioner claim that he performed vasectomy surgery during the years 2005 and 2008, however, the petitioner has filed the writ petition in the year 2025, after a lapse of 17 years, which is not sustainable.

Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant the relief sought for in this petition. The writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

11.09.2025 pri Index: Yes/ No Speaking Order: Yes/ No NCC: Yes/ No 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/09/2025 07:48:27 pm ) W.P.No.34575 of 2025 M.DHANDAPANI,J.

pri To 1 THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU, SECRETARIAT, FORT ST.GEORGE, CHENNAI – 600 002.

2 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU, SECRETARIAT, FORT ST.GEORGE, CHENNAI – 600 002.

3 THE DEAN, KILPAUK MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL, KILPAUK, CHENNAI – 600 010.

W.P.No.34575 of 2025

11.09.2025 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/09/2025 07:48:27 pm )