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) 37951

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, CJ, G.Arul Murugan, J
K.Sundararajan – Appellant
Versus
District Collector Office of the District Collector Villupuram – Respondent
W.P.No.17038 of 2026



Advocates:
For Petitioners: Mr.K.Thilageswaran
For Respondents:Mr.M.Habeeb Rahman Government Advocate

Court directs expeditious disposal of appeal on Scheduled Tribe status recognition within 12 weeks.

Headnote:The petitioner, belonging to Kaatunayakan Scheduled Tribe community, sought recognition of communal status. The Tribal Research Centre issued a report dated 18.10.2022 identifying petitioner and 30 others as eligible for Scheduled Tribe status under relevant constitutional provisions. Despite this, the Revenue Divisional Officer rejected the claim vide proceedings dated 24.5.2024. The court noted the appeal filed before the District Collector on 7.8.2024 remains undecided. The primary issue was the delay in disposing of the appeal against rejection of Scheduled Tribe status despite favourable enquiry report. The court's reasoning emphasized expeditious disposal of the appeal, recording the Government Advocate's submission for decision within twelve weeks. The writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to decide the appeal within twelve weeks from receipt of the order.

Table of Content
1. writ seeks direction for appeal disposal. (Para 2)
2. petitioner's scheduled tribe claim rejected despite report. (Para 3)
3. government assures appeal decision in 12 weeks. (Para 4)
4. court directs appeal disposal within 12 weeks. (Para 5)

2. This writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks a direction to the first respondent to pass an order in the appeal preferred by the petitioner and others against the proceedings of the fourth respondent dated 24.5.2024.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that he belongs to Kaatunayakan Scheduled Tribe community and he made a representation to the fourth respondent to recognize their communal status, for which a request was also made to the Tribal Research Centre by the fourth respondent to enquire the communal status of the petitioner and his people. Upon enquiry, a report dated 18.10.2022 was issued by the third respondent identifying the petitioner and 30 others as eligible for Scheduled Tribe status. Despite the same, the fourth respondent, vide order dated 24.5.2024, rejected the claim of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed an appeal before the first respondent on 7.8.2024. Till date, the first respondent has not passed any order on the said appeal. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

4. Today when the writ petition is taken up for hearing, learned Government Advocate, on instructions, submitted that the appeal filed by the petitioner will be decided by the first respondent within a period of twelve weeks.

5. Recording the submission made by learned Government Advocate, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to decide the appeal filed the petitioner and others against the proceedings of the fourth respondent dated 24.5.2024 within a period of twelve weeks from the date of a receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs.

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