HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA
Vinayagamani S – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector – Respondent
ORDER
Heard Mr.K.Mahendran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.J.Ashok, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3. Since no adverse order is going to be issued against the 4th respondent, notice to the 4th respondent is dispensed with.
2. The petitioner has filed the writ petition challenging the impugned order of the 2nd respondent dated 01.09.2023 and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to take suitable disciplinary action against the 4th respondent for the violation of Rule 7 of The Tamilnadu Government Servant Conduct Rules, 1973 within the time limit that may be stipulated by this Court.
3. The facts in nutshell that lead to the filing of the writ petition are as follows:
The 4th respondent, who is working as Village Administrative Officer, purchased 7 cents of lands on 28.06.2023 from one Syed Ibrahim. However, the said purchase of land is without obtaining necessary permission. Patta was also changed in the name of the 4th respondent subsequently. While so, for the agricultural land, the 4th respondent is said to have obtained building permission and built a commercial complex. Since the act of the 4th respondent in purchasin
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.