✦ High Court of India · 29 Apr 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 29 Apr 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
29 Apr 2025
Length
1,317 words

W.P.(MD)No.9177 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED: 29.04.2025CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABALW.P.(MD)No.9177 of 2025M.Seenisulthan ... PetitionerVs.1. The Secretary to the Government Home Department Government of Tamil Nadu Fort. St. George Chennai – 600 0092. The Director General of Police Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai Mylapore, Chennai- 600 004.3. The Additional Director General of Police Intelligence, DGP Office Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai Mylapore, Chennai- 600 0044. The Commissioner of Police Madurai City5. The Superintendent of Police SIU DGP Police Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai Mylapore, Chennai- 600 0041/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.9177 of 20256. The Superintendent of Police SBCID, DGP Officer Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai Mylapore, Chennai- 600 0047. The Deputy Superintendent of Police SBCID, Near Thamarai Thotti, Race Course, Madurai8. The Deputy Superintendent of Police SJU, New Natham Road, Madurai – 625 0079. The Inspector of Police B-1, Vilakkuthoon Police Station Madurai city ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from equating or relating the petitioner’s name with the accused in Crime No.821 of 2002 on the file of the ninth respondent in order to link with the communal activities of particular Muslim Organization by considering the petitioner’s representation dated 05.03.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Ramamurthy For Respondents : Mr. Veerakathiravan Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr. R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor 2/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.9177 of 2025ORDERThis Writ Petition has been filed forbearing the respondents from equating or relating the petitioner’s name with the accused in Crime No.821 of 2002 on the file of the ninth respondent in order to link with the communal activities of particular Muslim Organization by considering the petitioner’s representation dated 05.03.2025.2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the permanent resident of Madurai and he is a lawyer by profession and he is practicing before Madras High Court and its Bench at Madurai for the past 20 ½ years. He applied for the post of Special Government Pleader/Additional Government Pleader in the High Court of Madras and its Bench at Madurai vide Notification NO.1/2021 dated 14.04.2021. The Government of Tamil Nadu received the application of the petitioner on 28.07.20211 and issued an acknowledgment No. 1195 dated 28.07.2021 and he was selected for the post of Additional Government Pleader for the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court and to that effect the State Government released a tentative 3/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.9177 of 2025list of law officer-Madurai Bench on 14.10.2021. Police verification was conducted by SBCID police officials. There were totally 57 advocates short listed for the post of law officers at Madurai Bench and out of 57 advocates four advocates belongs to Muslim Community. However for the names of four advocates belongs to Muslim community were alone forwarded for second police verification to the respondents 5 to 8 and the petitioner name is one among the four person whose names were subjected to second police verification but no particulars were obtained from the petitioner and the respondent 5 to 8 have not contacted him. After completion of police verification the State Government released a G.O., on 11.11.2021 relating to the appointment of law officers in Madras High Court its Madurai Bench and the name of the petitioner was not found in the list of law officers. Therefore the petitioner approached the concerned officials at Secretariat, Chennai and he was orally informed by the officials that the third respondent has sent an adverse report against him as though he was a member of particular muslim organization. Further to substantiate the allegation the third respondent referred a case in Crime No.821 of 2022 on the file of the nineth respondent in connection with the bit notice during the burial event of 4/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.9177 of 2025one Imam Ali. The above said case was suo motu registered by B-1 Vilakuthoon Police Station against one Seeniappa under Section 505(i) of IPC and the petitioner is not an accused in that case. The petitioner never involved in any such unlawful activities and therefore the third respondent without conducting any proper verification simply forwarded a report against the petitioner to the public department. Therefore the petitioner has sent a representation on 03.01.2023 and 05.03.2025, however the respondents have not taken any action, hence the present petition has been filed.3. The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents would submit that the prayer of the petitioner is misconceived and the petitioner cannot question the communication which was made based on rules. The Government of Tamil Nadu has frames rules for appointment of law officers of High Court of Madras and its Bench in the year 2017 and based on the report only the candidates were selected, therefore the prayer of the petitioner cannot be considered and these respondents have no any role. So far as allegation against the respondents 5 to 8 are concerned without any basis they made 5/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.9177 of 2025false allegations but they have done their duty asper law. Therefore the respondents 5 to 8 have no role in appointment of law officers as alleged by the petitioner and the petition is liable to be dismissed.4. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.5. The prayer of the petitioner is to forbear the respondents from equating or relating the petitioner’s name with the accused in Crime No.821 of 2002 on the file of the ninth respondent in order to link with the communal activities of particular Muslim Organization by considering the petitioner’s representation dated 05.03.2025. As per the representation of the petitioner the Inespect of Police has sent a false adverse report against the petitioner and there are some allegations levelled against him that he belongs to muslim organization namely PFI And SDPI and also they referred a case in crime No.821 of 2002 on the file of the B-1 Vilakuthoon Police Station. In order to substantiate the said allegation levelled against the police officials there are no records produced by the petitioner and the petitioner only based on hearsay sent a representation and filed this petition. There are no materials to show that the respondents 5 to 8 have has sent adverse report against the petitioner 6/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.9177 of 2025by referring the pending cases. Without any materials the petitioner had sent a representation and also file this petition.6. Therefore the prayer of the petitioner cannot be considered and the petition is liable to be dismissed. However the petitioner has sent a representation dated 05.03.2025, but no records produced by the petitioner to prove that the representation was received by the respondent or not. The main grievance of the petitioner is that based on the pendency of the case in Crime No. 821 of 2002 on the file of the B-1, Vilakuthoon Police Station , Madurai his name has not been considered. While so, it is for the petitioner to challenge the case in Crime No. 821 of 2002 on the file of the B-1, Vilakuthoon Police Station, Maduraia District in the manner known to law.7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. 29.04.2025NCC :Yes / NoIndex :Yes / Noaav7/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.9177 of 2025To1. The Secretary to the Government Home Department Government of Tamil Nadu Fort. St. George Chennai – 600 0092. The Director General of Police Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai Mylapore, Chennai- 600 004.3. The Additional Director General of Police Intelligence, DGP Office Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai Mylapore, Chennai- 600 0044. The Commissioner of Police Madurai City5. The Superintendent of Police SIU DGP Police Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai Mylapore, Chennai- 600 0046. The Superintendent of Police SBCID, DGP Officer Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai Mylapore, Chennai- 600 0047. The Deputy Superintendent of Police SBCID, Near Thamarai Thotti, Race Course, Madurai8. The Deputy Superintendent of Police SJU, New Natham Road, Madurai – 625 0078/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.9177 of 20259. The Inspector of Police B-1, Vilakkuthoon Police Station Madurai city10.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.9/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.9177 of 2025P.DHANABAL, J.aavW.P.(MD)No.9177 of 2025 29.04.202510/10

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments