IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Date:23.3.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR Writ Petition No.7313 of 2011 and W.P.No.1 of 2011 S.Thilagavathi, ... Petitioner vs. 1.The District Collector, Namakkal District, Namakkal. 2.The Tahsildar, Namakkal, Namakkal District. 3.The Block Development Officer, Tiruchengode Panchayat Union, Namakkal District. ... Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the explanation offered by the petitioner dated 22.4.2009 and pass orders afresh pertaining to the proceedings of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.0718/2009/PA3 dated 16.10.2009 together with the Notification Published in the Namakkal District Gazette in issue No.6 dated 21.11.2009 in Roc.No.0718/09 (PA-3) dated 16.10.2009 as directed by this Court in W.P.No.26302 of 2009 on 15.6.2010 within a stipulated time. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Vengadesh For Respondents : Mr.S.Shivashanmugam, Government Advocate. O R D E R Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the explanation offered by the petitioner dated 22.4.2009 and pass orders afresh pertaining to the proceedings of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.0718/2009/PA3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ dated 16.10.2009 together with the Notification Published in the Namakkal District Gazette in issue No.6 dated 21.11.2009 in Roc.No.0718/09 (PA-3) dated 16.10.2009 as directed by this Court in W.P.No.26302 of 2009 on 15.6.2010 within a stipulated time. 2. Mr.S.Shivashanmugam, learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf of the respondents. 3. The overanxious, petitioner, the President of Chikkanaickenpalayam Panchayat, has filed the second writ petition for a direction to the first respondent to pass final orders in the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Section 205 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act. 4. It will be pertinent to point out that earlier this Court in W.P.No.26302 of 2009 on 15.6.2010 set aside the order of removal passed against the petitioner by the District Collector, the Inspector of Panchayat, and directed the District Collector, the first respondent to reconsider the entire issue on merits. It is for the District Collector to decide the matter after going into the issue. 5. Petitioner has now come forward with the prayer as above stating that the proceeding should be concluded within a time frame. As rightly pointed out by Mr.S.Shivashanmugam, learned Government Advocate, in a proceeding initiated under Section 205 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act, there is no time limit specified. The first respondent need not be hastened as it will lead to passing of an order without application of mind and without reason, which was the reason for setting aside the earlier order. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to direct the District Collector to conclude the proceeding in a particular manner or within a particular time frame as that will amount to interfering with the power and discretion vested with the District Collector, the first respondent. The first respondent is expected to deal with the matter in a fair manner and within a reasonable period of time as may be necessary. 6. The Writ Petition is, therefore, disposed of with the above observation. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ts To 1.The District Collector, Namakkal District, Namakkal. 2.The Tahsildar, Namakkal, Namakkal District. 3.The Block Development Officer, Tiruchengode Panchayat Union, Namakkal District. + 1 cc to Mr. Government Pleader Sr.21120 + 1 cc to Mr.T. Vengadesh, Sr.21087 W.P.No.7313 of 2011 VS(CO) Eu 8.4.11 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/