1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 28.09.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P(MD)No.11157 of 2011 Gandhimathinathan .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration, Elilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-5. 2.The Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration & Water Distribution Department, Government of Tamilnadu, Chennai-9. 3.The Director of Local Fund Audit, Kuralagam Fourth Floor, Chennai-108. 4.The Commissioner, Tirunelveli Municipal Corporation, Tirunelveli-1. 5.The Deputy Director of Local Fund Audit, Tirunelveli Municipal Corporation, Tirunelveli-1. 6.Durai Chandrasekaran, Additional Director of Municipal Administration, Elilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-5. .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 5 to recover the amount due from the sixth respondent as per the liability fixed by the local Fund Audit before he retires from service on superannuation. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Kannan For R-1 to R-5 : Mr.M.Govindan Special Govt. Pleader R-6 : Dispensed with O R D E R ********** This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 to 5 to recover the amount due from the sixth respondent as per the liability fixed by the local Fund Audit before he retires from service on superannuation. 2. Heard Mr.V.Kannan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Govindan, learned Special Government Pleader, who takes notice for R-1 to R-5. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3. It is seen that the petitioner has not enclosed the relevant documents in the typed set of papers. The petitioner has failed to establish prima facie as to how the sixth respondent is due and payable certain amount. The order passed by the competent authority as against the sixth respondent has not been enclosed. The Writ Petition has been filed on a vague affidavit bereft of details. Such a Writ Petition if admitted will cause serious prejudice to the sixth respondent and will end in waste of time for this court. The petitioner's request that he will furnish the further documents, itself justifies that the Writ Petition has been filed in a haste and without application of mind. 4. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed giving liberty to the petitioner to pursue the matter as per law. No Costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Crl. Side) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar (C.S) To 1.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration, Elilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-5. 2.The Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration & Water Distribution Department, Government of Tamilnadu, Chennai-9. 3.The Director of Local Fund Audit, Kuralagam Fourth Floor, Chennai-108. 4.The Commissioner, Tirunelveli Municipal Corporation, Tirunelveli-1. 5.The Deputy Director of Local Fund Audit, Tirunelveli Municipal Corporation, Tirunelveli-1. + 1 cc to Mr.V.Kannan, Advocate, SR No.34498 + 1 cc to The Special Government Pleader, SR No.33981 W.P.(MD)No.11157 of 2011 28.09.2011 pm RJ/18.10.11 2p/8c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/