SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

Monthly Archive: January 2022

For Petitioners      : Mr.S.Prabhakaran, Senior Counsel for Mrs.Dakshayani Reddy for petitioner in WP.No.736 of 2022 Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan, Senior Counsel for Mr.G.Sankaran for petitioner in WP.No.953 of 2022 Mr.T.Mohan for Ms.T.Dharani for petitioner in WP.No.958 of 2022 and   Mr.P.S.Raman,                                    Senior Counsel for Mr.Deepan Udhay for petitioner in WP.No.1201 of 2022 Mr.M.Vijayakumar for petitioner in WP.No.1268 of 2022                                 For Respondents Mr.R.Shanmugasundaram, Advocate General assisted by Mr.P.Muthukumar, State Government Pleader for State Mr.S.Sivashanmugam, Standing Counsel for State Election Commission COMMON ORDER (Order of the Court was made by the Hon’ble Acting Chief Justice) THE HON’BLE MR.MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU W.P.Nos.736, 953, 958, 1201 & 1268 of 2022 & WMP.Nos.807, 1019 & 1376 of 2022

Uncategorized

For Petitioners      : Mr.S.Prabhakaran, Senior Counsel for Mrs.Dakshayani Reddy for petitioner in WP.No.736 of 2022 Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan, Senior Counsel for Mr.G.Sankaran for petitioner in WP.No.953 of 2022 Mr.T.Mohan for Ms.T.Dharani for petitioner in WP.No.958 of 2022 and   Mr.P.S.Raman,                                    Senior Counsel for Mr.Deepan Udhay for petitioner in WP.No.1201 of 2022 Mr.M.Vijayakumar for petitioner in WP.No.1268 of 2022                                 For Respondents Mr.R.Shanmugasundaram, Advocate General assisted by Mr.P.Muthukumar, State Government Pleader for State Mr.S.Sivashanmugam, Standing Counsel for State Election Commission COMMON ORDER (Order of the Court was made by the Hon’ble Acting Chief Justice) THE HON’BLE MR.MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU W.P.Nos.736, 953, 958, 1201 & 1268 of 2022 & WMP.Nos.807, 1019 & 1376 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:    25.01.2022 CORAM : THE HON’BLE MR.MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU W.P.Nos.736, 953, 958, 1201 & 1268 of 2022 &...

Include petner name in the electrole list mhc order full order of. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 31.01.2022 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M. SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.1678 of 2022 Mr.E.Sukumar …Petitioner Vs. 1.The Commissioner Salem Corporation Salem. 2.The Booth Level Officer Suramangalam Salem. 3.The Executive Officer Sasanaickenpatty Panchayat Dasanaickenpatty. 4.The Booth Level Officer Dasanaickenpatty. …Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of mandamus, Directing the 1st respondent to include petitioner’s name in the 1st respondents’ electoral roll pursuant to the recommendation of the 4th respondent and the acceptance of the 2nd respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.A.R.L.Sundaresan [Senior Counsel] For Respondents : Mrs.K.Bhuvaneswari (Standing Counsel for Salem Corporation) [R1] O R D E R Writ of Mandamus has been instituted to direct the 1st respondent to include the name of the petitioner in the first respondent’s electoral roll pursuant to the recommendations of the 4th respondent and the acceptance of the 2nd respondent. 2. The petitioner states that he is residing at No.6/171/D1, Rajapuram, Salem, 636201. Earlier the petitioner was residing at No.20, SreeSowdambika Nagar, Dasanacikenpatty, Salem 636201. After shifting of his residence in the present address, the petitioner has been continuously residing. The earlier residential address of the petitioner falls under Veerapandi Assembly constituency and the present address falls under Salem West Assembly constituency. The election identity card no. of the petitioner is BDW1306521 and the Serial No. of his electoral roll is 744 in the third respondent’s electoral roll. 3. After shifting of the residence from Dasanacikenpatty to Rajapuram, the petitioner approached the respondents during January 2021 to delete his name from the electoral rolls of Dasanacikenpatty and to add his name in the Salem Corporation electoral roll. Due to the pandemic situation, the transfer could not be effected. Thus, the petitioner casted his vote in the 2021 constituency vote from Dasanacikenpatty. 4. The petitioner submitted an application on 25.06.2021 to the Booth Level Officer namely respondents 2 and 4 to delete his name from the electoral roll of the 3rd respondent and include his name in the electoral roll of the 1st respondent. The Booth Level Officer, the 2nd and 4th respondent, who are appointed under Section 13B(2) of the Representation of the People Act, are competent to effect changes based on the applications submitted by the petitioner. Accordingly, the application was recommended for deletion of the name of the petitioner from the electoral roll of the 3rd respondent and for inclusion in the 1st respondent’s electoral roll. 5. Now, the elections for Salem Corporation is announced. In view of the facts that the application submitted by the petitioner has not been considered, he is not in a position to exercise his franchise in Salem Corporation wherein he resides. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner mainly contended that the petitioner submitted an application on 25.06.2021 and the application ought to have been considered by the competent authorities within a reasonable period of time. Despite, the effort taken by the petitioner, the application was kept in cold storage and no order has been passed. The Authorities have failed in their duty to consider the application submitted for transfer. Thus, the right of the petitioner has been violated. 6. This Court is of the considered opinion that the electoral roll must be prepared before elections. All applications submitted for inclusion, deletion and transfer must be considered before the last date notified. In the event of any failure on the part of the Authorities, the same should not result denial of exercise of the right of a voter, wherein he ordinarily resides. 7. In the present case, even during January 2021, the petitioner approached the Authorities for deletion of his name and for inclusion of his name in Salem Corporation. An appropriate application in Form 7 was also submitted on 25.06.2021 and the acknowledgment is also enclosed by the petitioner in the typed set of papers filed along with the writ petition. While so, the inaction of the authorities competent should not affect the Fundamental Right of a citizen to cast his vote within his territorial jurisdiction where the voter resides. The non-consideration of the application filed by the petitioner wold result denial of an opportunity even to contest in the elections. Thus, the infringement of Right in this regard is in violation of Fundamental Rights ensured under Part-III of the Constitution of India and therefore, the non-consideration of the application submitted by the writ petitioner within a reasonable period of time is a clear lapse, negligence and dereliction of duty on the part of the Authorities who are responsible to finalise the applications within the final date notified. 8. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Salem Corporation made an objection by stating that the last date is 20.01.2022. However, the learned counsel for the respondents is unable to defend the ground raised by the petitioner that his application is yet to be considered by the competent authorities. This being the factum, the petitioner is entitled for the relief. Accordingly, the 1st respondent is directed to include the name of the petitioner in the electoral roll pursuant to the recommendation of the 4th respondent. If the petitioner is otherwise eligible and his application is in accordance with the procedures as contemplated. The decision in this regard is directed to be taken and inclusion also is to be made, if the petitioner is otherwise eligible, within a period of 24 hours from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The learned Standing Counsel is directed to inform this order immediately to the Commissioner, Salem Corporation before 6.00 p.m. today i.e. 31.01.2022. With these directions the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. 31.01.2022 shr/ska Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking Order Note: Registry is directed to issue order copy today i.e. 31.01.2022. To 1.The Commissioner Salem Corporation Salem. 2.The Booth Level Officer Suramangalam Salem. 3.The Executive Officer Sasanaickenpatty Panchayat Dasanaickenpatty. 4.The Booth Level Officer Dasanaickenpatty. S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J. shr/ska W.P.No.1678 of 2022 31.01.2022 senior arl sundaresan

Uncategorized

Include petner name in the electrole list mhc order full order of. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 31.01.2022 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M. SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.1678 of 2022 Mr.E.Sukumar …Petitioner Vs. 1.The Commissioner Salem Corporation Salem. 2.The Booth Level Officer Suramangalam Salem. 3.The Executive Officer Sasanaickenpatty Panchayat Dasanaickenpatty. 4.The Booth Level Officer Dasanaickenpatty. …Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of mandamus, Directing the 1st respondent to include petitioner’s name in the 1st respondents’ electoral roll pursuant to the recommendation of the 4th respondent and the acceptance of the 2nd respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.A.R.L.Sundaresan [Senior Counsel] For Respondents : Mrs.K.Bhuvaneswari (Standing Counsel for Salem Corporation) [R1] O R D E R Writ of Mandamus has been instituted to direct the 1st respondent to include the name of the petitioner in the first respondent’s electoral roll pursuant to the recommendations of the 4th respondent and the acceptance of the 2nd respondent. 2. The petitioner states that he is residing at No.6/171/D1, Rajapuram, Salem, 636201. Earlier the petitioner was residing at No.20, SreeSowdambika Nagar, Dasanacikenpatty, Salem 636201. After shifting of his residence in the present address, the petitioner has been continuously residing. The earlier residential address of the petitioner falls under Veerapandi Assembly constituency and the present address falls under Salem West Assembly constituency. The election identity card no. of the petitioner is BDW1306521 and the Serial No. of his electoral roll is 744 in the third respondent’s electoral roll. 3. After shifting of the residence from Dasanacikenpatty to Rajapuram, the petitioner approached the respondents during January 2021 to delete his name from the electoral rolls of Dasanacikenpatty and to add his name in the Salem Corporation electoral roll. Due to the pandemic situation, the transfer could not be effected. Thus, the petitioner casted his vote in the 2021 constituency vote from Dasanacikenpatty. 4. The petitioner submitted an application on 25.06.2021 to the Booth Level Officer namely respondents 2 and 4 to delete his name from the electoral roll of the 3rd respondent and include his name in the electoral roll of the 1st respondent. The Booth Level Officer, the 2nd and 4th respondent, who are appointed under Section 13B(2) of the Representation of the People Act, are competent to effect changes based on the applications submitted by the petitioner. Accordingly, the application was recommended for deletion of the name of the petitioner from the electoral roll of the 3rd respondent and for inclusion in the 1st respondent’s electoral roll. 5. Now, the elections for Salem Corporation is announced. In view of the facts that the application submitted by the petitioner has not been considered, he is not in a position to exercise his franchise in Salem Corporation wherein he resides. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner mainly contended that the petitioner submitted an application on 25.06.2021 and the application ought to have been considered by the competent authorities within a reasonable period of time. Despite, the effort taken by the petitioner, the application was kept in cold storage and no order has been passed. The Authorities have failed in their duty to consider the application submitted for transfer. Thus, the right of the petitioner has been violated. 6. This Court is of the considered opinion that the electoral roll must be prepared before elections. All applications submitted for inclusion, deletion and transfer must be considered before the last date notified. In the event of any failure on the part of the Authorities, the same should not result denial of exercise of the right of a voter, wherein he ordinarily resides. 7. In the present case, even during January 2021, the petitioner approached the Authorities for deletion of his name and for inclusion of his name in Salem Corporation. An appropriate application in Form 7 was also submitted on 25.06.2021 and the acknowledgment is also enclosed by the petitioner in the typed set of papers filed along with the writ petition. While so, the inaction of the authorities competent should not affect the Fundamental Right of a citizen to cast his vote within his territorial jurisdiction where the voter resides. The non-consideration of the application filed by the petitioner wold result denial of an opportunity even to contest in the elections. Thus, the infringement of Right in this regard is in violation of Fundamental Rights ensured under Part-III of the Constitution of India and therefore, the non-consideration of the application submitted by the writ petitioner within a reasonable period of time is a clear lapse, negligence and dereliction of duty on the part of the Authorities who are responsible to finalise the applications within the final date notified. 8. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Salem Corporation made an objection by stating that the last date is 20.01.2022. However, the learned counsel for the respondents is unable to defend the ground raised by the petitioner that his application is yet to be considered by the competent authorities. This being the factum, the petitioner is entitled for the relief. Accordingly, the 1st respondent is directed to include the name of the petitioner in the electoral roll pursuant to the recommendation of the 4th respondent. If the petitioner is otherwise eligible and his application is in accordance with the procedures as contemplated. The decision in this regard is directed to be taken and inclusion also is to be made, if the petitioner is otherwise eligible, within a period of 24 hours from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The learned Standing Counsel is directed to inform this order immediately to the Commissioner, Salem Corporation before 6.00 p.m. today i.e. 31.01.2022. With these directions the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. 31.01.2022 shr/ska Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking Order Note: Registry is directed to issue order copy today i.e. 31.01.2022. To 1.The Commissioner Salem Corporation Salem. 2.The Booth Level Officer Suramangalam Salem. 3.The Executive Officer Sasanaickenpatty Panchayat Dasanaickenpatty. 4.The Booth Level Officer Dasanaickenpatty. S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J. shr/ska W.P.No.1678 of 2022 31.01.2022 senior arl sundaresan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 31.01.2022 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M. SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.1678 of 2022 Mr.E.Sukumar          …Petitioner Vs. 1.The Commissioner    Salem Corporation    Salem. 2.The Booth Level Officer...

டாஸ்மாக் மதுபான கடைகளில் பார்கள் அமைப்பதற்கான டெண்டரை எதிர்த்து தொடரப்பட்ட வழக்குகள் தள்ளுபடி .mhc judge saravanan please send full order copy

Uncategorized

டாஸ்மாக் மதுபான கடைகளில் பார்கள் அமைப்பதற்கான டெண்டரை எதிர்த்து தொடரப்பட்ட வழக்குகள் தள்ளுபடி .mhc judge saravanan please send full order copy

டாஸ்மாக் மதுபான கடைகளில் பார்கள் அமைப்பதற்கான டெண்டரை எதிர்த்து தொடரப்பட்ட வழக்குகள் தள்ளுபடி .. #madrashighcourt #tasmacjudge saravanan    டாஸ்மாக் மதுபான கடைகளில் பார்கள் அமைப்பதற்கான டெண்டரை எதிர்த்து தொடரப்பட்ட வழக்குகள் தள்ளுபடி .. #madrashighcourt #tasma   டாஸ்மாக் மதுபான கடைகளில் பார்கள் அமைப்பதற்கான...

33.Lord Vinayaka has been my favourite deity since childhood. Of course, there has been a steady addition to the pantheon. The latest is Lord Mahavira.  I offer flowers daily to them.  The Ganesha idol which I worship daily has been named as Fr.Pillaiyar. 

Uncategorized

33.Lord Vinayaka has been my favourite deity since childhood. Of course, there has been a steady addition to the pantheon. The latest is Lord Mahavira.  I offer flowers daily to them.  The Ganesha idol which I worship daily has been named as Fr.Pillaiyar. 

33.Lord Vinayaka has been my favourite deity since childhood. Of course, there has been a steady addition to the pantheon. The latest is Lord Mahavira.  I offer flowers daily to them.  The Ganesha idol...

Lavanya sucide case cbi enqiire ordered full order ofTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Crl OP(MD)No.1344 of 2022 Muruganantham … Petitioner . For Petitioner  :  Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkatachalapathy For Respondents :   Mr.T.Senthil Kumar,                           1 to 4     Additional Public Prosecutor For Intervenor :   Dr.Fr.Xavier Arulraj,     Senior Counsel,     for Ms.Amala Irudhaya Mary. & Mr.Menitto

Uncategorized

Lavanya sucide case cbi enqiire ordered full order ofTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Crl OP(MD)No.1344 of 2022 Muruganantham … Petitioner . For Petitioner  :  Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkatachalapathy For Respondents :   Mr.T.Senthil Kumar,                           1 to 4     Additional Public Prosecutor For Intervenor :   Dr.Fr.Xavier Arulraj,     Senior Counsel,     for Ms.Amala Irudhaya Mary. & Mr.Menitto

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT RESERVED ON :  28.01.2022 DELIVERED ON : 31.01.2022 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Crl OP(MD)No.1344 of 2022 Muruganantham … Petitioner Vs. 1.The Director General of...

Kumara Devan: கி வீரமணி,சுப. வீரபாண்டியன் உள்ளிட்ட 8 பேர் மீதான வழக்கு ரத்து செய்யப்பட்டது. 18.04 .2016 அன்று சென்னை இந்து சமய அறநிலை துறை அலுவலகத்திற்கு முன்பு அனைத்து ஜாதியினரும் அர்ச்சகராகலாம் என்ற உச்ச நீதிமன்றத்தின் ஆணை

Uncategorized

Kumara Devan: கி வீரமணி,சுப. வீரபாண்டியன் உள்ளிட்ட 8 பேர் மீதான வழக்கு ரத்து செய்யப்பட்டது. 18.04 .2016 அன்று சென்னை இந்து சமய அறநிலை துறை அலுவலகத்திற்கு முன்பு அனைத்து ஜாதியினரும் அர்ச்சகராகலாம் என்ற உச்ச நீதிமன்றத்தின் ஆணை

[1/31, 12:56] Kumara Devan: கி வீரமணி,சுப. வீரபாண்டியன் உள்ளிட்ட 8 பேர் மீதான வழக்கு ரத்து செய்யப்பட்டது. 18.04 .2016 அன்று சென்னை இந்து சமய அறநிலையத் துறை அலுவலகத்திற்கு முன்பு அனைத்து ஜாதியினரும் அர்ச்சகர் செய்யலாம் என்ற உச்ச நீதிமன்றத்தின் ஆணை அமுல்படுத்தி அனைத்து...

WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com