Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K.SURENDER, J
R. Naveen Vikash – Appellant
Versus
The Tahsildar, Tenkasi Taluk, Tenkasi District – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of the proceedings challenged. (Para 1) |
| 2. importance of notice in administrative process. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's directive for remand and fair hearing. (Para 5 , 6) |
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings dated 24.11.2025 passed by the second respondent.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.
3. The only ground raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he was not put on notice before the impugned order was passed.
4. Learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents fairly concedes that there is no specific averment in the impugned orders to show that notice was served on the petitioner.
5. Since the petitioner had not been put on notice before the impugned order was passed, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the second respondent for the purpose of affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, after issuing notice to all concerned parties.
6. With the above observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently connect
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
