Back
2018 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 210
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K. Kalyanasundaram, J
Ponnuraj v. Secretary To Revenue Department Chennai and Others
Writ Petition (PIL) No. 45 of 2018
For the Appellant: Mr.F.X.Eugene
For the Respondents: Mr.A.K. Baskara Pandian
Public Interest Litigations must genuinely address public grievances; courts cannot assume executive functions in administrative matters.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 21, Article 32, Article 49 and Article 51-A(f) - Public Interest Litigation - The petitioner sought realignment of certain villages to a different Taluk based on unanimous local sentiment. The court highlighted limitations of PILs, emphasizing the executive's domain in administrative matters and the need for a genuine grievance to justify PILs. (Paras 7, 8, 12, 13)
(B) Judicial Activism - The courts must not usurp the roles of the legislature and executive, which could compromise democratic principles. A PIL aimed at resolving every grievance is not sustainable. The court must ensure that PILs do not lead to judicial overreach. (Paras 11, 14)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner expressed the grievances of village residents over administrative inefficiencies and unsuccessful attempts to realign villages to improve local governance based on collective community opinion.
Findings of Court:
The court recognized the necessity of public sentiments in governance but concluded that the issues presented fell within the executive's prerogative, thus no judicial relief could be granted.
Issues: The key issue was whether the court could intervene in the realignment process and whether the public sentiment should influence such administrative decisions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled against the petition due to the nature of executive functions and emphasized the limitations of judicial intervention in administrative realignment cases. The judiciary lacks resources and expertise to manage executive functions.
Result: Writ Petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. public sentiment for external administrative alignment. (Para 1 , 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. representation made to authorities without action taken. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. judicial caution in entertaining pils. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. judiciary limits in executing executive governance. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
1. This Writ Petition is filed by the writ petitioner, as a Public Interest Litigation, as a resident of Ilayarasanendal, Kovilpatti Taluk, Thoothukudi District, stating among other things that originally his Village was in Sankarankovil Taluk, Tirunelveli District and after realignment of the erstwhile Tirunelveli District, 12 Villages in Ilayarasanendal Firka were added to Kovilpatti Taluk, Thoothukudi District and came into force with effect from 01.05.2008. The petitioner would further state that even though after the bifurcation and realignment of the said 12 Villages were added to Kovilpatti Taluk in Thoothukudi District, the concerned Departments functioning were not divided or shifted accordingly and therefore, the residents of 12 Villages in Ilayarasanendal Firka have to take a long trip to go to different Departments for redressal of their grievances and the petitioner in paragraph No.3 of the affidavit has also pointed out that and the same is extracted hereunder: -
2. The petitioner would further aver that a new Revenue Taluk came to be formed namely 'Thiruvengadam Taluk'. Once again, there wasa proposal for realignment and therefore, the opinion of the local people was also called for by the Tahsildar, Kovilpatti. While so, in Notification, dated 06.05.2014, majority of them expressed their opinion to join with the proposed Thiruvengadam Taluk in Tirunelveli District. The concerned Village Panchayat boards also passed resolutions and expressed their opinion in joining with Thiruvengadam Taluk, Tirunelveli District. Despite such a majority opinion of realignment, no action was taken in aligning 12 Villages in Ilayarasanendal Firka with the Thiruvengadam Taluk. With regard to the same, the petitioner has also submitted a representation, dated 19.01.2016 to the second respondent and also to the concerned officials by registered post including to the Chief Minister's Cell. That apart, all the Panchayats in the Firka also, passed unanimous resolutions, to adhere their relevant Panchayats, to the same proposed Thiruvengadam Taluk in Tirunelveli District and now, the said Taluk also formed and came into existence, however, no action has been taken to add 12 Villages in Ilayarasanendal Firka into Thiruvengadam Taluk, Tirunelveli District.
3. The main grievance expressed by the petitioner is that in the light of the unanimous opinion of the residents of 12 Villages to align with Thiruvengadam Taluk, Tirunelveli District, the first respondent ought to have passed appropriate orders for such a realignment and without understanding the public sentiments and difficulties faced by them, to go around various places for redressal of their grievances and hence, he came forward to file a Writ Petition, as a Public Interest Litigation.
4. Mr.F.X.Eugene, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the typed - set of documents and would submit that for the welfare and convenience of the people of the said locality is utmost important and originally 12 Villages in Ilayarasanendal Firka were in Tirunelveli District and on formation of cities, it was realigned and subsequently, Thiruvengadam Taluk in Tirunelveli District came to be formed and all the 12 Panchayat Boards had passed a unanimous resolution to realign Thiruvengadam Taluk and the people of the locality have also expressed their desire to do so and though the said fact was brought to the knowledge of the concerned officials through personal representations as well as written representations, no action has been taken so far, taking into consideration their sentiments and therefore, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Cou
