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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 19367

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J
Dr.S.Gayathri – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009. – Respondent
W.P.(MD)No.4390 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy
For the Respondents:Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam Government Advocate

The court allows a petitioner's formal request for the return of original documents based on statutory guidelines for service bonds.

Headnote:This judgment concerns a Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, where the petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus for the return of original certificates submitted during her Post-Graduate course admission, which was supported by a bond. The court finds that the government reduced the service bond period, and with no written request made by the petitioner for certificate returns, her request could be entertained. The court issues permission for the petitioner to formally request the return of her documents. The Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner for the written request with a directive for the documents' return within a week thereafter.

Table of Content
1. request for return of submitted documents. (Para 1 , 2)
2. need for written request emphasized. (Para 3)
3. court grants liberty to submit a written request. (Para 4)

O R D E R

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to return the original certificates and documents, including her Post-Graduate Degree Certificate, which were submitted at the time of admission to the Post-Graduate course in the fifth respondent College.

2. The petitioner had executed a bond undertaking that, upon successful completion of the Post-Graduate course, she would serve the Government for a period of two years. After completion of the course, the Government issued an order reducing the bond period from two years to one year. Though the petitioner expressed her willingness to serve the Government, no posting order was issued. Consequently, the reduced bond period has since expired.

3. Mr. N. Ramesh Arumugam, learned Government Advocate, submitted that the petitioner has not made any written request seeking return of her original documents/certificates. He further submitted that, if such a written request is made, the original documents/certificates furnished by the petitioner at the time of admission would be returned. The said submission is placed on record.

4. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a written request to the respondents for return of her original documents/certificates. Upon receipt of such written request, the respondents shall return the documents/certificates to the petitioner within a period of one week thereafter. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

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