The petitioner in Madras High Court was the councilor of the 6 th Ward of Mettur Municipality elected in the local body election held in the year 2011 as the candidate sponsored by All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) .
Madras High Court division bench after considering found that despite a challenge to the order passed under Section 14 of the Act of 2022 by maintaining an appeal, the said order has been indirectly challenged simultaneously by maintaining this writ petition.
If an inquiry is conducted against the officer resulting in his exoneration, the allegation becomes frivolous”, observed the Madras High Court division bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N. Mala.
Madras High Court after considering the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner, and perusuing the documents on record observed that there is nothing on record to prove the title of the petitioner in the land in question, for which notice in Form-III of the Act of 2007 has been given.
To analyze as to whether there is any encroachment , the Division Bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N. Mala have perused the records, where the land is shown to be 'Nandhavanam' and accordingly it is kept under the temple controlled by the HR&CE Department.
Madras High Court division bench observed that the challenge to the Circular dated 07.11.2019 has been made precisely in reference to the order dated 18.05.2018 passed by the Apex Court in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.9857 of 2018.
Before addressing the issue, Madras High Court division bench find it necessary to address the locus of the petitioner. The writ petition has not been filed by the educational institution, but by the individual showing him to be the Correspondent of Little Flower Matriculation School.
Madras High Court division bench asked counsel for the petitioner to refer to the document, where the order of court exists. It was stated that there exists no order of the court and thereby the statement of fact given in the representation in reference to the court's order became false.