Civil suits against state officers acting in good faith are barred under Section 16 of the Tamil Nadu Act 14/1982; failure to exhaust trial court remedies precludes High Court intervention.

ORDER :

P. DHANABAL, J.

1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to strike off the plaint pending in O.S.No.104/2022 on the file of the Additional District Judge, FTC Court, Vellore.

2. The respondent herein has filed a suit in O.S.No.104/2022 on the file of the learned Additional District Judge, Vellore claiming damages of a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- as against the petitioner herein.

3. According to the petitioner he is the defendant in the main suit and he is working as Deputy Inspector General Police, Tirunelveli Range. Earlier he worked as Superintendent of Police, Vellore District from 30.07.2018 to 04.09.2020. The respondent / plaintiff filed a suit for compensation of a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- as damages in respect of a detention order in C3/D.No.68/2020 dated 29.07.2020 passed by the District Collector cum District Magistrate, Vellore against the respondent.

4. A proposal has been sent by the Inspector of Police to the District Collector, Vellore through Superintendent of Police, Vellore on 26.07.2000 against the respondent / defendant to initiate proceedings under TAMIL NADU ACT 14/1982 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) since the respondent had acted against the maintenance of public order and public peace. The petitioner has forwarded the proposal of the Inspector of Police, DCB, Vellore to the District Collector, Vellore. Thereafter, the District Collector, Vellore has passed an order to detain the respondent through the detention order dated 29.07.2020 in good faith. Subsequently, the detention order has been revoked by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu as per G.O.Rt.No.3637 Home, Prohibition and Exercise (IX) Department dated 04.09.2020 on the recommendation of the Advisory Board letter dated 27.08.2020. The petitioner pleads that the suit is barred under Section 16 of the Act since the action was taken in good faith. There is no cause of action for the suit and the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is excluded as per Section 16 of the Act. Therefore, the present petition is filed to strike off the plaint.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner / defendant would contend that the petitioner, when he was working as Superintendent of Police, Vellore, had forwarded a letter from the Inspector of Police, Vellore on 26.07.2000 against the respondent to initiate proceedings under the Act. Based on the proposal, the District Collector cum District Magistrate, Vellore has passed an order to detain the respondent / plaintiff on 29.07.2020 in a good faith. Thereafter, the detention order has been revoked on the recommendation of the Advisory Board vide letter dated 27.08.2020. Later, the respondent / plaintiff has filed a suit in O.S.No.104 of 2022 before the Additional District Court, Vellore for claiming compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- for damages. There is a bar under Section 16 of the Act since the petitioner acted on good faith and therefore the pending suit is barred by law. Accordingly, the plaint in O.S.No.104/2022 on the file of Additional District Judge, Vellore has to be stuck off.

6. In support his above contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the following judgments :

i) Allahabad Bank Vs. Shanks , AIR 2009 CAL 96

ii) Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority Vs. K.S. Narayan , (2006) 8 Supreme Court Cases 336

iii) State of Punjab Vs. Amarjit Singh ,(2011) 14 SCC 713

iv) Jayanthi and another Vs. Tamil Nadu Housing Board , SLP No. 16804/2021 dated 05.01.2022

v) Tamil Nadu Housing Board Vs. Jayanthi and Ors. ,C.R.P. (NPD) No. 3610 of 2018 dated 03.08.2021

vi) M.G. Hanif Vs. The Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department and Ors. , W.P. No. 5522 of 2015 dated 21.09.2015

7. The learned counsel for the