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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 61112

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ, G.ARUL MURUGAN, J
A.Raghunathan – Appellant
Versus
The Chief Secretary to Government Chief Secretariat – Respondent
W.P.No.37080 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.P.Suresh
For the Respondents: Mr.S.Raveekumar Government Pleader (Pondy)

The misuse of public interest litigation is not tolerated when prior petitions dismissing similar claims exist.

Headnote:The judgment addresses the misuse of public interest litigation, citing prior dismissals of similar petitions that sought relief stemming from governmental actions. Important determinations include the dismissal of the current petition due to non-disclosure of prior cases and the imposition of costs. The issues framed revolve around the legitimacy of the petitioners' claims and prior petitions. The court reasoned that the present petition was a rehash of a previously dismissed case, thereby validating its dismissal.

Table of Content
1. misuse of public interest litigation (Para 1 , 2)
2. prior cases impact current claims (Para 3)
3. consistent legal representation indicates strategic advancement of status (Para 4)
4. imposition of costs for needless litigation (Para 5)

Misuse and abuse of august forum of public interest litigation is on the rise. This is one classic example. These very petitioners, earlier joined with one R.Gopal to file W.P.No.31137 of 2025 [R.Gopal and 5 others versus Chief Secretary to Government] seeking to challenge action of removal of persons by authorities, including petitioners, by way of public interest litigation.

2. Serious exception was taken by this Court and the petition was dismissed, but with liberty to espouse individual cause holding that public interest litigation, at the hands of aggrieved person, would not be maintainable.

3. Conveniently suppressing the fact of filing earlier writ petition, petitioners herein filed this second petition, again, styled as public interest litigation. This time without impleading R.Gopal, first petitioner in earlier W.P.No.31137 of 2025. It is clear that all petitioners in the present petition were petitioners 2 to 6 in earlier petition W.P.No.31137 of 2025.

4. Unfortunately, in both the cases, counsel is one and the same.

5. Petition is dismissed with cost of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) payable to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, Chennai, within a period of two months. W.M.P.No.41496 of 2025 filed to permit petitioners to file single writ petition is allowed subject to payment of separate court-fee within two weeks. Other interim application is dismissed.

(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J)

07.10.2025 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No kpl To

1. The Chief Secretary to Government Chief Secretariat, Goubert Avenue Puducherry 605 001.

2. The Secretary to Government (LA)

Chief Secretariat, Goubert Avenue Puducherry 605 001.

3. The District Collector Revenue Complex, Pettaiyanchatiram Puducherry 605 009.

4. The Executive Engineer Buildings & Roads (Central)

Public Works Department Puducherry 605 001. 5. The Commissioner Ariyankuppam Commune Panchayat Ariyankuppam Puducherry 605 007.

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND G.ARUL MURUGAN,J.

(kpl)

W.P.No.37080 of 2025

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 Back to top