Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 4174 (MAD)

R. Vijay Kumar v. Joint Commissioner Coimbatore

2013-12-12

M.VENUGOPAL

body2013
JUDGMENT 1. The Petitioners have focused the instant Writ of Mandamus praying for issuance of an order by this Court calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the First Respondent in R.P.No.1/2012/B1 dated 20.01.2012 and quash the same and further, the Petitioners have also sought for passing of an order by this Court for directing the First Respondent to dispose of R.P.No.1/2012/B1 dated 20.01.2012 on the file of the First Respondent. 2. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that the First Respondent/Joint Commissioner for Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Administration Department, Coimbatore-18, on 20.01.2012, issued notice in R.P.No.1 /2012/B1 (in which the Petitioners have been impleaded as respondent) and as per the said notice, the date of hearing was mentioned as 22.02.2012 at 3.00 p.m. etc., 3. Added further, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioners urges before this Court that in the impugned notice in R.P.No.1 of 2012/B1, dated 20.01.2012, the First Respondent, (Serial No.5) passed the following order: "5. The operation of the orders of the Assistant Commissioner, Coimbatore, referred to above is stayed till 22.02.2012." and the same is not a legally tenable one in law. 4. A cursory perusal of the impugned notice in R.P.No.1 of 2012/B1, dated 20.01.2012, indicates that the First Respondent while issuing notice for the hearing date on 22.02.2012 at 3.00 p.m has also passed an order of stay of the orders of the Second Respondent/the Assistant Commissioner, Coimbatore till 22.02.2012, without any independent application being filed by the concerned party/parties seeking necessary stay in this regard. 5. The Learned Counsel for the Fourth Respondent submits that the First Respondent passed the impugned notice in R.P.No.1/2012/B1, dated 20.01.2012, in a proper manner and as such, the same is sustainable in law. Further, it is also represented on behalf of the Fourth Respondent that the First Respondent passed the order of stay in a judicious fashion and therefore, the same may not be interfered with by this Court at this distinct point of time. 6. Further, it is also represented on behalf of the Fourth Respondent that the First Respondent passed the order of stay in a judicious fashion and therefore, the same may not be interfered with by this Court at this distinct point of time. 6. In view of the fact that the R.P.No.1/2012/B1, dated 20.01.2012, as on date, is pending on the file of the First Respondent/Joint Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Administration Department, Coimbatore-18, this Court on the basis of Equity and Fair play, directs the First Respondent to dispose of the R.P.No.1/2012/B1 pending on its file within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order (After providing necessary opportunities to all the parties concerned and also by adhering to the principles of Natural Justice in true letter and spirit). It is open to the respective parties to raise all factual and Legal pleas before the First Respondent at the time of Final hearing of R.P.No.1/2012/B1 in the manner known to Law and in accordance with Law. 7. With the aforesaid observations, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.