IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. Subramaniam, J.
Pattali Makkal Katchi, Rep. it's President, G.K. Mani – Petitioner
Versus
The Additional Chief Secretary/Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Revenue Department - Administration Disaster Management and Mitigation Department & Another – Respondents
W.P. No. 4072 of 2014 & M.P. No. 1 of 2014
Decided On : 23-09-2021
Constitution of India - Article 226 - Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 - Damage to property - Enquiry - Petitioner contended that he is not responsible for any damages or committed any such offence of causing damage to the public properties - Whether petition is maintainable - Held, Petitioner has not established lack of jurisdiction or otherwise for the purpose of entertaining the writ petition - Admittedly, the notice of hearing is under challenge - Thus, the petitioner is at liberty to submit their objections, explanations, documents, evidences, etc., for the purpose of defending their case by availing the opportunities to be provided - Petition disposed of
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the proceedings in SR No.943/MTC/KPM/2013 dated 17.06.2013 of the 1st respondent herein and quash the same.)
1. The writ on hand has been instituted questioning the notice of hearing dated 17.06.2013, directing the petitioner to appear for an enquiry either in person or through counsel and file written statement in respect of the allegation being under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
2. The impugned notice states that an application under the Act claiming compensation from the petitioner for the revenue loss caused due to Non Operation and Partial Operation of the Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Chennai) buses in Chennai, Kancheepuram and Thiruvallur District owned by the Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Chennai) Limited, during the agitation held by the petitioner party members for the period from 25.04.2013 to 19.05.2013 is preferred. The said application is posted for the appearance of the petitioner on 02.07.2013 in the Chambers of the Additional Chief Secretary/Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005. The petitioner has chosen to file a writ petition instead of defending their case before the first respondent Additional Chief Secretary to Government.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the petitioner is not responsible for any damages or committed any such offence of causing damage to the public properties. On political considerations, the impugned notice has been issued with an ulterior motive. Thus, the impugned notice is untenable and liable to be set aside.
4. On 25.04.2013, Pattali Makkal Katchi and Vanniar Sangam on behalf of Dr.S.Ramadoss had conducted "Chithirai Thiruvizha" at Mamallapuram. The Pattali Makkal Katchi party members who came to participate in the same festival are alleged to have entered into a wordy quarrel at Kadayam Theru Colony Bus stop near Marakanam and as a result of the same, damage to the property had occurred. For numerous hours, traffic was affected in East Coast Road and that pursuant to the said violence, the sculptors and statutes of political leaders are alleged to have been damaged. The party workers are said to have violated the conditions imposed by the Police and hence, the party members were arrested by the Police. As a consequence to the same, on 30.04.2013, demonstrations were contemplated to be held without the permission of the Police at Krishnagiri and hence, Dr.S.Ramadoss and the President of the petitioner Party among 500 members were arrested and on account of the same, members of the Party and Vanniar Sangam had indulged in road roko, pelting of stones on vehicles, felling of trees, damaging public property. On account of the same, a tense situation prevailed in Kancheepuram, Thiruvallur and Chennai Districts from 25.04.2013 to 19.05.2013 and the public movements were being affected. The normal life of the public at large was affected.
5. The broad allegations against the petitioner are extracted in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition itself. With reference to the said allegations, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that all such allegations are false and frivolous. The petitioner's members had not involved in commission of any offence nor caused any damage to the public properties. No doubt, a tensed situation was created during the particular period and the MTC buses could not be operated during the appropriate time. However, the respondents cannot blame the petitioner for such incidents. The impugned notice of hearing merely states that due to non-operation of the Transport Corporation Buses at the instance of the petitioner party, monetary loss sustained by the Transport Corporations are to be compensated.
6. The learned coun
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.