1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.08.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P(MD)No.4447 of 2011 G.Sivabalan .. Petitioner Vs. 1. The District Collector, Madurai. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai. 3. The Tahsildar, T.Vadipatti, Madurai District. 4. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai. 5. M.Soundra Pandian, President, Hindu Nadar Uravinmurai Paripalana Sangam, Sholavandan. 6. P.S.Jeyaraj, Secretary, Hindu Nadar Uravinmurai Paripalana Sangam, Sholavandan. .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents herein to take appropriate action against 5th and 6th respondents on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 18.03.2011 in accordance with law. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Muthuganesa Pandian For Respondents : Mr.R.Anandha Raj, Government Advocate for R.1 to R.4 : Notice dispensed with for R.5 and R.6 O R D E R This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner for a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents herein to take appropriate action against 5th and 6th respondents on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 18.03.2011 in accordance with law. 2. Heard Mr.K.Muthuganesa Pandian, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Anandha Raj, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents 1 to 4. 3. In view of the order to be passed, notice to the respondents 5 and 6 is dispensed with. 4. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 5. The petitioner has made a representation to the first respondent on 18.03.2011 stating that the respondents 5 and 6 excommunicated his family. Since the representation has not been considered so far, this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 6. Without going into the merits of the petitioner's case, the District Collector/first respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 18.03.2011, on its own merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. Since the complaint is against the respondents 5 and 6 stating that they have excommunicated the petitioner from their caste, the authority should hear the respondents 5 and 6, if any action is contemplated based on the allegations made by the petitioner. It is made clear that this Court does not express any opinion about the merits of the petitioner's complaint and the Authority shall dispose the same on its own merits. The petitioner will have to prove his case before the competent authority as above. 7. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. SD ASST REGISTRAR ( RTI Act ) /TRUE COPY/ ssl SUB ASST REGISTRAR To 1. The District Collector, Madurai. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai. 3. The Tahsildar, T.Vadipatti, Madurai District. 4. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai. 1CC TO THE SPL GOVT PLEADER SR: 25585: DM::2011:AUGUST:22:: W.P(MD)No.4447 of 2011 01.08.2011 2P:6C:: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/