Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 27 - July 3 2022

A weekly round-up of important cases from Madras High Court and its subordinate courts. Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 270 To 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 280 NOMINAL INDEX Mohamed Jiyaputheen v. State of Tamil Nadu and Another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 270 M/s.Progressive Stone Works Versus The Joint Commissioner (ST), 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 271 Mahalakshmi v. The Superintendent of Police and others, 2022 Livelaw (Mad) 272 St. Mary's Matriculation Higher Secondary School v. .The Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 273 Sunku Vasundhara v State Bank of India, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 274 Dinesh v. State, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 275 P.Sudha v. The Secretary and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 276 S.Sarath Kumar v. The District Collector and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 277 M/s. Dishnet Wireless Limited versus the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 278 Ganesan v. SHO and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 279 M/s. Redington (India) Limited versus Principal Additional Director General, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 280 REPORTS 1. Plea To Substitute Order Of 'Compulsory' Retirement With 'Voluntary' Doesn't Require Adjudication On Merits: Madras HC Grants Relief To Retd Judge Case Title: Mohamed Jiyaputheen v. State of Tamil Nadu and Another Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 270 The Madras High Court recently allowed the plea filed by a former District Judge seeking to amend an order for compulsory retirement as that of voluntary retirement. The bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala observed that the issue did not require adjudication on merits. The court noticed that the order of compulsory retirement was not being challenged and the prayer was limited to substituting the order of compulsory retirement with the order of voluntary retirement. As this prayer did not require any adjudication of merits, the court allowed the application. 2. Writ Petition Not Maintainable If Alternative Statutory Remedy Was Available With The Taxpayer: Madras High Court Reiterates Case Title: M/s.Progressive Stone Works Versus The Joint Commissioner (ST) Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 271 The Madras High Court has reiterated that a writ petition is not maintainable if an alternative statutory remedy was available to the taxpayer. The single bench of Justice C. Saravanan has observed that there are a few exceptions to the rule of alternative remedy. Firstly, where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with the provisions of the enactment in question. Secondly, in defiance of the fundamental principles of judicial procedure. Thirdly, authorities have resorted to invoking the provisions that were repealed. Fourthly, when an order has been passed in total violation of the principles of natural justice, 3. Allegations Of Illegal Detention By Police Officers: Madras High Court Directs To Preserve CCTV Footage Case Title: Mahalakshmi v. The Superintendent of Police and others Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Mad) 272 Justice V. Sivagnanam of the Madurai Bench recently directed the Superintendent of Police, Deputy Superintendent Of Police and Inspector of Police of Sankarankovil Town Police Station, Tenkasi District and Inspector of Police, Rajapalam Police Station, Viruthunagar District to preserve the CCTV footages recorded on the 6th and 7th April in connection with an allegation of illegal detention against certain police officials after observing that the same was important to adjudicate the issue involved in the case. 4. Madras High Court Dismisses School's Plea Against Adjacent Opening Of Fuel Pump Case Title: St. Mary's Matriculation Higher Secondary School v. .The Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum and others Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 273 The Madras High court recently dismissed a petition moved by a school challenging grant of NOC to Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, for opening of a fuel pump adjacent to its building. The bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala opined that the contentions raised in the challenge were not maintainable. The court however directed HPCL to ensure that all the necessary safety measures were observed while operating the retail outlet and no inconvenience should be caused. 5. Cannot Invoke Article 226 If An Effective And Statutory Remedy Exists Before NCLAT: Madras High Court Case Title: Sunku Vasundhara v State Bank of India Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 274 The High Court of Madras Bench comprising of Justice T. Raja and Justice K. Kumaresh Babu, while adjudicating a writ petition filed in Sunku Vasundhara v State Bank of India, has held that when an effective and statutory remedy lies before the Appellate Authority i.e. National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), aggrieved parties cannot invoke Article 226 of the Constitution of India for relief. The order was passed on...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 27 - July 3 2022

Upasana Sajeev

Tags