Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 33252

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, CJ, G. Arul Murugan, J
Rahul – Appellant
Versus
The Chief Election Commissioner Election Commission of India – Respondent
W.P.(MD) No.10027 of 2026

Advocates:
For the Petitioner(s): Ms.C.Geetha
For Respondent(s): Mr.Niranjan Rajagopalan for R1 & R2, Mrs.E.Ranganayaki Addl. Govt. Pleader for R3 & R4

PIL not maintainable in service matters like official transfers.

Headnote:First Paragraph: The petition under Article 226 seeks mandamus for considering representations dated 24.02.2026 and 18.03.2026 to transfer revenue officials working over five years in native villages connected with election duties, ensuring free and fair elections on 23.04.2026 per Election Commission guidelines. Court found no maintainable public interest litigation in service matters, citing Supreme Court precedent that PILs are impermissible for service disputes. Second Paragraph: Issue framed as maintainability of PIL for directing transfers of government officials. Ratio decidendi holds PILs not maintainable in service matters, as settled by Supreme Court in relevant judgment; petition deemed perverse and misconceived. Last Paragraph: Writ petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs.

Table of Content
1. pil seeks direction for official transfers on representations. (Para 1)
2. pil impermissible in service matters per supreme court. (Para 2)
3. petition misconceived; disposed without costs. (Para 3 , 4)

By this petition styled as a ‘public interest litigation’, the petitioner seeks a direction upon the respondents to take appropriate action on the petitioner’s representations dated 24.02.2026 and 18.03.2026, regarding transfer of Government officials within the State of Tamil Nadu.

2. It is well settled that no public interest litigation is maintainable in service matters. This issue is covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan vs. State of Maharashtra , 1(2013) 4 SCC 465, wherein the Apex Court has held that such a course of action is not permissible so far as service matters are concerned.

3. The petitioner’s attempt seeking transfer of officials through a public interest litigation is nothing but perverse and misconceived. Accordingly, we refrain from entertaining this petition. However, the Election Commission of India would be free to deal with the representation if any submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law.

4. The writ petition stands disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 33252

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASSushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, CJ, G. Arul Murugan, JRahul – AppellantVersusThe Chief Election Commissioner Election Commission of India – RespondentW.P.(MD) No.10027 of 2026

PIL not maintainable in service matters like official transfers.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, CJ, G. Arul Murugan, J
Rahul – Appellant
Versus
The Chief Election Commissioner Election Commission of India – Respondent
W.P.(MD) No.10027 of 2026