BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Date : 18/12/2025

CORAM

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.VIJAYAKUMAR

and WMP(MD) Nos.23523 and 23524 of 2025

M.Sudha ... Petitioner

Vs

1. The Government of Tamilnadu

Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department

Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009. 2.The Director of Town Panchayat

Directorate of Town Panchayat

7^th and 8^th Floor, Urban Administrative Office Campus

Chennai 600 028.

3. The Assistant Director of Town Panchayat,

Jawahar Nagar, NGO B Colony

Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli

4.The Executive Officer,

Alangulam Special Grade Town Panchayat,

Alangulam, Tenkasi District.

5.Subash Chandra Bose

9^th ward Councillor, Alangulam Special Grade Town Panchayat,

Alangulam, Tenkasi District ... Respondents

(R5 has been impleaded as per order dated 04.12.2025 in WMP(MD) No.25260/2025)

PRAYER :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the 4^th respondent in his proceedings in e.f.vz;.355/2023 ehs; 17.10.2025 and quash the same as without jurisdiction and non application of mind.

For Petitioner : Mr.Ananth C.Rajesh For Respondents : Mr.Veera Kathiravan Additional Advocate General assisted by Mrs.D.Farjana Ghoushia Special Government Pleader for R1 to R4 Mr.J.Barathan for R5

ORDER

The present writ petition has been filed by a Ward Councillor cum Chairman of Alangulam Town Panchayat challenging the order dated 17.10.2025 passed by the 4^th respondent herein, wherein, the petitioner has been informed that she has been disqualified under Section 32(1)(j) and Section 35 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act')

2. The 5^th respondent in the writ petition has approached the Ombudsman of the Tamil Nadu Local Bodies seeking a direction against the 4^th respondent herein to declare the disqualification of the writ petitioner. After hearing the writ petitioner, an order was passed on 17.10.2025 directing the Director of Town Panchayats to initiate appropriate legal action.

3. Since no proceedings were initiated pursuant to the orders of the Ombudsman, WP(MD) No.23970/2024 was filed, wherein a direction was issued to the 4^th respondent to consider the representation of the 5^th respondent. Since there was allegations of violation of the said order, contempt proceedings were initiated by the 5^th respondent in Cont.P(MD) No.2845/2025. Pending contempt proceedings, a show cause notice was issued to the writ petitioner on 25.09.2025 to the effect that why she should not be disqualified. An explanation was submitted by the writ petitioner to the 4^th respondent on 06.10.2025. Thereafter the present impugned order has been passed on 07.10.2025 intimating the writ petitioner that she has ceased to hold the office. Referring the order dated 17.10.2025, Contempt Petition was closed on 22.10.2025. Challenging the order of the 4^th respondent dated 17.10.2025, the present writ petition has been filed.

4. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the 4^th respondent is not the competent authority to issue the order of disqualification. According to him, only the District Court of the concerned District would have jurisdiction whatsoever to entertain the question to disqualify a Councillor.

5. Per contra, the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents relying upon Section 32(1)(j) and Section 35 of the Act submitted that the ceasing to hold office on the ground of disqualification is automatic and therefore, the present order of the 4^th respondent is nothing but an intimation to the writ petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner was issued with a show cause notice and she has also submitted her reply. He relied upon Section 35 of the Act and submitted that on receipt of the show cause notice or after being intimated about the disqualification, the petitioner alone has to approach the competent Court contending that she is not disqualified