SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Mad) 163

MARKANDEY KATJU, D.MURUGESAN
Ammanambakkam Panchayat – Appellant
Versus
D. Vedachalam – Respondent


Advocates:
V. Subbarayan, for Appellant; V. Raghu-pathy G. P. for Resp. 2.

Judgement

D. MURUGESAN, J. :- The first respondent (writ petitioner) is the Vice President of Ammanambakkam Panchayat, Kanchee-puram District. In terms of Section 188 (3) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, he is entitled to sign the cheque along with the President of the Panchayat. By a resolution dated 10-4-2003, the Panchayat resolved to permit a ward member to sign the cheque on behalf of the Vice-President along with the President. The said resolution was passed on the ground that the first respondent refused to sign the cheques presented by the appellant. On the allegation that the first respondent refused to sign the cheques only because the amount was exorbitant and that the withdrawal was a scandal and he cannot be deprived of his right to sign the cheque, he filed the writ petition for a mandamus forbearing the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Tirukazhukundram Branch from disbursing any amount standing in the name of the Ammanambakkam Panchayat in A/c Nos. VP-10,11, 40, 41 and 44 without the signature of the President and the Vice-President. The writ petition was allowed and the direction was issued as prayed for, on the ground that in the event the Vice President



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top