writ of mandamus

This tag is associated with 12 posts

compensation for wrongful detention by abusing the police powers – apex court granted 2 lakhs – Crime No.11/98 was registered against the appellant under Section 3 of the Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act, 1922 and Section 505(1)(b) of the Indian Penal Code = the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in W.A. No.1426 of 2010 is under challenge. By the impugned judgment the Division Bench u­pheld the judgment dated 27th April, 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No.1243 of 2003 and dismissed the appeal, affirming the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge by his judgment dismissed the writ petition preferred by the appellant claiming the damages and praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay him jointly and severally a sum of Rs.10,00,000/­ for his alleged illegal detention and confinement. = Mala fides means want of good faith, personal bias, grudge, oblique or improper motive or ulterior purpose. The administrative action must be said to be done in good faith, if it is in fact done honestly, whether it is done negligently or not. An act done honestly is deemed to have been done in good faith. An administrative authority must, therefore, act in a bona fide manner and should never act for an improper motive or ulterior purposes or contrary to the requirements of the statute, or the basis of the circumstances contemplated by law, or improperly exercised discretion to achieve some ulterior purpose. The determination of a plea of mala fide involves two questions, namely (i) whether there is a personal bias or an oblique motive, and (ii) whether the administrative action is contrary to the objects, requirements and conditions of a valid exercise of administrative power.= It has already been noticed that the respondents before the Advisory Board or before the trial court failed to bring on record any evidence to frame the charges against the appellant under Section 3 of the Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act, 1992 and under Section 505(1)(b) of the IPC or under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. In spite of the same, Ist respondent, 2nd respondent, V.Jegannathan, the then Inspector General and Commissioner of Police, Salem City and the 3rd respondent, M. Ramasamy, the then Inspector of Police, Fairlands Police Station, Salem City before this Court have taken similar plea that the appellant was inciting the police personnel in Tamil Nadu to form an association to fight for their rights and toured the districts of Coimbatore, Tiruchirapalli, Pudukottai and Chennai City and incited the serving police personnel over forming of an association, and acted in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. By way of additional affidavit certain so called statements of persons have been enclosed which have been filed without any affidavit and were neither the part of the trial court record or material placed before the Advisory Board. The aforesaid action on the part of the Ist, 2nd, 3rd and 4th respondent in support of their act of detaining the appellant illegally by placing some material which has beyond the record justifies the appellant’s allegation that the respondents abused their power and position to support their unfair order. In view of the observation made above, though we do not give specific finding on mala fide action on the part of the Ist, 2nd, 3rd and 4th respondent but we hold that the respondent­State and its officers have grossly abused legal power to punish the appellant to destroy his reputation in a manner non­oriented by law by detaining him under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 in lodging a Criminal Case No.11/98 under Section 3 of the Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act, 1992 and under Section 505(1)(b) of the IPC based on the wrong statements which were fully unwarranted.

published in http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=40488 Page 1 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4815    OF 2013 (ARISING OUT OF SLP(C) NO.32704 OF 2010) N. SENGODAN        … APPELLANT VERUS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME (PROHIBITION & EXCISE) DEPARTMENT, CHENNAI AND OTHERS            … RESPONDENTS J U D G M E N T SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J. Leave granted. 2. In   this   appeal   the   judgment   dated   16th  August,   2010 passed by the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in W.A.   No.1426   of  2010   is  under   challenge.   By  the  impugned judgment the Division Bench u­pheld the judgment dated 27th April,   … Continue reading

PROLOGUE : “Child Sexual Abuse happens because the system of silence around the act perpetuates it.” “Child Sexual Abuse represses children; the repression of children is unlikely to create a flourishing society, economically, emotionally, equally or spiritually”. [‘Bitter Chocolate’ – Child Sexual Abuse in India by Pinki Virani – Penguin Books – 2000] 2.Indian Scenario : 2.1.In order to examine the incidence of sexual abuse among child respondents, the questionnaire was administered to 12,447 children belonging to the five different categories including children in family environment, children in schools, children in institutions, children at work and street children. The study looked into four severe forms and five other forms of sexual abuse. Out of the total child respondents, 53.22% reported having faced one or more forms of sexual abuse that included severe and other forms. Among them 52.94% were boys and 47.06% girls. The age wise distribution of children reporting sexual abuse in one or more forms showed that though the abuse started at the age of 5 years, it gained momentum 10 years onward, peaking at 12 to 15 years and then starting to decline. This means that children in the teenage years are most vulnerable. [Sexual Abuse of Children : (para 6.2)] 2.2.Out of the total child respondents, 20.90% were subjected to severe forms of sexual abuse that included sexual assault, making the child fondle private parts, making the child exhibit private body parts and being photographed in the nude. Out of these 57.30% were boys and 42.70% were girls. Over one fifth of these children faced more than three forms of sexual abuse. Amongst these sexually abused children, 39.58% were in the age group of 5-12 years, 35.59% in the age group of 15-18 years and 24.83% in the age group of 13- 14 years. [Severe forms of sexual abuse :(para 6.2.1)] 2.3.From the data available, an analysis of severe forms of sexual abuse arranged age-wise revealed that sexual abuse crossed the 5% mark from the age of 10 years, peaked at 15 years and by the time the child reached 18 years, went below the 5% mark. 73% of the total incidence of child sexual abuse was reported among children between 11 and 18 years of age. Therefore the pre-adolescent to the adolescent child seems to be most at risk. It is also disturbing to note that children between 6 and 10 years also face severe forms of sexual abuse. [Study on Child Abuse : India 2007 : Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India : Pages 74, 75 and 76]

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT     DATED: 07/03/2012 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.(MD)No.8355 of 2011 and W.P.(MD)No.12572 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 M.Veersamy .. Petitioner in both writ petitions Vs. 1.State of Tamilnadu, represented by Home Secretary, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai. 2.District Collector, Madurai District, Collectorate, Madurai. 3.Superintendent … Continue reading

writ not maintainable in respect of any property under wakf act=The Act itself provides for an alternative remedy by way of a suit before the Wakf Tribunal constituted under Section 83 of the Act for redressal of any grievance against notice issued under Section 54(3) of the Act. When there are several factual disputes staring in this case as indicated above, it is for the petitioners to approach the Tribunal for redressal by way of filing a civil suit by raising all contentions and inviting the Tribunal for decision on all those factual disputes by leading oral and documentary evidence in support of them. I do not find any valid or legal reasons to entertain this writ petition. =3) Section 54(4) of the Act reads as follows: “(4) Nothing contained in sub-section (3) shall prevent any person aggrieved by the order made by the Chief Executive Officer under that sub-section from instituting a suit in a Tribunal to establish that he has right, title or interest in the land, building, space or other property.”

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU WRIT PETITION No.67 of 2012   DATE: 27.01.2012   Between: Pangaluri Nageswara Rao and 2 others                                              …… Petitioners And The Chief Executive Officer, A.P.State Wakf Board and 2 others …..Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU WRIT PETITION No.67 of 2012 ORDER : … Continue reading

writ of mandamus directing the respondent Corporation not to acquire the land of the petitioner-temple for the purpose of road widening, without issuing notice to it and without following due procedure as laid down under Sections 146 and 147 of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) and further not to grant any compensation to any of the encroachers of the temple land without issuing notice to the petitioner-temple. 2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, may be stated as follows: The petitioner-Sri Chitragupta Temple is endowed in 1907 and it is now under the supervision of the Endowments Department. Recently, the Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department, has constituted Board of Trustees vide proceedings No.A2/3259/2009, dated 04.11.2010 and the land in an extent of Acs.3.00 belonging to the petitioner-temple is under the control and management of the Board of Trustees. A portion of the temple land was occupied by number of encroachers and the said encroachers have created certain fictitious documents showing as if they are the owners of the said land. The petitioner is taking steps to evict the said encroachers from the temple land. = Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to follow due procedure as contemplated under Sections 146 and 147 of the Act, in case the petitioner is the title holder of the land in question. There shall be no order as to costs.

THE HON‘BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.64 OF 2012 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Corporation not to acquire the land of the petitioner-temple for the purpose of road widening, without issuing notice to it and without following due procedure as laid down under Sections 146 and … Continue reading

promotions – ban ?= The only grievance of the petitioners is that the ban that was imposed by the Government is in respect of recruitment but not for promotions and the same has been clarified in Memo dated 22.08.2005, which reads as under: “Government after careful examination of the matter referred by the Director of School Education, AP, Hyderabad in the reference cited, hereby clarify that the prohibition imposed in Act-2 of 1994 and the ban orders in memo No.12080/COSE/A2/2004-4, dt.20.10.2004 will not apply in cases of promotion of the candidates from one cadre to another higher cadre. In view of the above, the Director of School Education, AP., is hereby permitted to consider the case of promotion of Smt.K.E.Snehalatha, Grade-II, Telugu Pandit to Grade-I, Telugu Pandits per the normal Procedure.”

IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JANUARY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWELFTH PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH   W.P. No.18 and 97 of 2012   Between:   W.P. No.18 of 2012: Peddu Vijaya Lakshmi …      Petitioner and The Government of A.P., Rep.by its Secretary, School Education Department, Secretariat, … Continue reading

Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘the Act’) =It is evident from the record that petitioners 1 to 6 were served with the demand notice under Section 13(2) of the Act on 01.12.2010 and as far as petitioner No.7 is concerned, the same was stated to be published in two newspapers on 01.02.2011. Subsequently, the petitioners made representation to the respondent-bank on 27.10.2011, requesting to consider their case, to which the bank gave reply, dated 31.01.2011, rejecting their representation. Copies of the said reply of the bank, which were acknowledged by the petitioners, were also filed along with the counter-affidavit, which shows that the petitioners were given due opportunity to put their case to the demand notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Act and subsequently, the notice under Section 13(4) of the Act was issued.

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No.7018 of 2011   ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed)             This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent in issuing notice, dated 31.01.2011, under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction … Continue reading

SRFAESI Act.=the first respondent-Bank is taking measures for taking possession/sale of the immovable property in pursuance of the possession notice dated 14.9.2010 issued under Section 13(4) of the SRFAESI Act. When once the Tribunal is seized off the matter and there is no decision rendered on merits, it is not open for this Court to determine the rights of the parties. Hence, we are not inclined to exercise our jurisdiction inasmuch as there is no decision rendered by the Tribunal on merits.

  HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR     WRIT PETITION  NO. 1691 OF 2011 Between: Sri K. Rajendra Naidu S/o Sri Seshaiah Naidu                                      ………….Petitioner   AND The State Bank of India  represented by its Authorized Officer  and one another                             ………….Respondents     ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This Writ Petition has … Continue reading

the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘SARFAESI Act’).=The fact remains that the petitioner did not repay the outstanding dues of Rs.17.5 lakhs as on date and therefore, the impugned sale notices have been issued. Once the provisions of Section 13(4) of SARFAESI Act have been followed, the petitioner cannot find fault with the subsequent events, as it is for the petitioner to deliver possession or the only course open to the bank is to seek assistance from either the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate. In the instant case, as the petitioner failed to deliver possession, the bank took possession of the property with the assistance of the District Collector by break opening the lock on 16.02.2009 under the cover of panchanama with regard to the inventory of immovable property, which also cannot be found fault with. – in view of the default, the respondent bank issued notice dated 08.09.2007, under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, which was acknowledged by the petitioner on 20.09.2007. It is stated that the petitioner did not give any explanation nor did he respond to the said notice and therefore, the possession notice dated 14.11.2008, under Section 13(4) read with Rule 8(1) was sent to the petitioner and he acknowledged the same on 20.11.2008. The possession notice dated 14.11.2008 was also published in Indian Express dated 25.12.2008. 4. The aforesaid averments have neither been contraverted nor the petitioner has filed any reply, therefore, it cannot be said that the procedure under Section 13 of SARFAESI Act has not been followed. Admittedly, the petitioner received Section 13(2) notice on 20.09.2007 and Section 13(4) notice was also received on 28.11.2008 but so far no action has been taken. If the procedure under Section 13 of SARFAESI Act is not followed, the course open to the petitioner is to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. As the procedure under Section 13 of SARFAESI Act has become final and as the petitioner neither paid the debt amount nor handed over the possession, the bank has to take recourse to Section 14 of SARFAESI Act. Under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act it is open to the secured creditor to seek assistance of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate in taking possession of the secured asset. In the instant case, the District Collector being the District Magistrate his assistance was taken. Accordingly, the District Collector had passed orders dated 06.01.2009 and 19.01.2009 directing the SDPO, Amalapuram to provide necessary security while taking possession of the above said property.


the maintainability of the Writ Petition for quashing criminal proceedings more so when charge sheets have already been filed and the cases have been taken cognizance by the competent criminal Court and (ii) the scope of interference of this Court with the criminal proceedings. The consequential issue to be considered is whether this Court’s interference is warranted to quash the criminal proceedings in the present case.

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.18428 of 2009 9-6-2011 M.B. Rajanikanth and another The State Inspector of Police,Visakhapatnam and others Counsel for the petitioners: Sri B. Chinnapa Reddy Counsel for respondents 1and2: Sri P.Kesava Rao Counsel for respondents 3-5:Sri Sampath Prabhakar for The petitioners, who are the former employees of the Vijaya … Continue reading

KARNATAKA CERTAIN INAMS ABOLITION ACT, 1977: ss. 4 (2) (b) and 10 – Abolition of Inams – Inamdar regranted the land – Erstwhile mortgagee claiming the mortgage to have been revived consequently – Held: High Court was not justified in concluding that s. 43 of Transfer of Property Act is relevant – Neither s. 43 of TP Act nor s. 10 of Karnataka Act has application to the facts of the case -Matter remitted to High Court for consideration afresh – Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – s. 43 – Doctrine of feeding the estoppel. A religious institution, namely, Kannada Mutt, was granted certain Jagir lands. Upon abolition of Inams by virtue of Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act, 1977, the lands stood vested with the State Government. However, the appellant being the Matadhisathi of the Mutt was allowed re- grant of the land. The respondents, who were the erstwhile mortgagees, claimed possession of the land in question contending that by virtue of order of re-grant in favour of the appellant, the earlier mortgage was revived and possession of the land could not be granted to the appellant. When the matter reached the Division Bench of the High Court in writ appeals, it held that s. 43 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 was applicable. Aggrieved, the Mathadhipati filed the appeals. = Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 A bare reading of s.4 of the Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act, 1977 makes it clear that notwithstanding any contract, all Inam tenures stood abolished and the consequences were the passing of the rights, title and interests as provided in s.4(2)(b). Section 10 of the Act has no application to the facts of the case. [para 6-7] [ 442-E, F; 443-B] Syed Bhasheer Ahamed and Ors. V. State of Karnataka ILR 1994 Kar 159 – distinguished. 1.2 The sine quo non for application of s.43 is that at the initial stage the person should have fraudulently or erroneously represented that he is authorized to transfer certain immovable property or professes to transfer such property for consideration. Only then the question of option of the transferee arises in case the transferor acquires any interest in the property at any time during which the contract of transfer subsists. Therefore, the High Court was not justified in concluding that s.43 is relevant. [para 6] [ 442-G, H; 443-A] 2. Without expressing any opinion about the acceptability of any stand taken by the respondents, the judgment of the High Court is set aside and the matter is remitted to it for consideration afresh. It is made clear that the issue relating to applicability of s.43 stands closed. [para 8] [444-B, C] Case Law Reference ILR 1994 Kar 159 distinguished para 6 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 1040-1053 of 2009 From the Judgement and Order dated 12.09.2007 of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in W.A. No. 1936-40 & 1941-45 of 2005 Rama Jois, G.V. Chandrshekar, N.K. Verma, Anjana, Chandrashekar, for the Appellant. A.K. Subbaiah, S.J. Amith, Aparna Bhat, Kiran Suri, Sanjay R. Hegde, for the Respondent.

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1040-1053 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 3733-3746 of 2008) Ni. Pra Channabasava D.S. Matadhipathigalu ..Appellant Kannada Mutt Versus C.P. Kaveeramma and Ors. ..Respondents JUDGMENT Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Challenge in these appeals is to the … Continue reading

Blog Stats

  • 2,907,359 hits



Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,908 other subscribers
Follow advocatemmmohan on WordPress.com