BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 02/12/2008
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA
W.P.(MD)No.10980 of 2008
and
M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2008
R.Santha Ram ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep., by its Secretary,
Home Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai-9.
2.The Competent Authority &
The District Revenue Officer,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Economic Offences Wing-II,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents
Prayer
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
for issuance of a Writ of declaration, declaring that Tamil Nadu Protection
of interest of depositors (in Financial Establishment) Act, (T.N.Act 44/97) 1997
is ultra vires unconstitutional.
!For Petitioner ... Mr.R.Anand
^For Respondents ... Mr.D.Sasikumar
Government Advocate
:ORDER
This writ petition has been filed to declare that Tamil Nadu Protection of
interest of depositors (in Financial Establishment) Act, (T.N.Act 44/97) 1997 is
ultra vires and unconstitutional.
2. Heard R.Anand, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Sasikumar,
learned Government Advocate who took notice on behalf of the respondents.
3. This writ petition has been filed seeking for the following relief:
“The petitioner prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a
writ, order of Direction or any other writ in the nature of writ of declaration
declaring that Tamil Nadu Protection of interest of depositors (in Financial
Establishment) Act, (T.N.Act 44/97) 1997 is ultra vires unconstitutional and
pass such any or other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in
the circumstances case and render justice.”
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner himself in all fairness at the
out set would draw the attention of this Court to the Full Bench decision of
this Court in S.Bagavathy Vs. State of Tamil Nadur, rep. by its Secretary, Law
Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9 & The Competent Authority, District
Revenue Officer, Madurai reported in 2007(2) CTC 207 upholding the validity of
the said Act. As such, the decision of the Full Bench is squarely binding on
this Court and accordingly this writ petition ought not have been even numbered.
5. Heard the learned Government Advocate.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would also submit that Special
Leave Petition as against the Full Bench’s decision cited supra, is also pending
in the Hon’ble Apex Court.
7. Hence, in such a case, this writ petition is not maintainable.
Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected
Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed.
dp/smn
To
1.The Secretary,
Government of Tamil Nadu
Home Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai-9.
2.The Competent Authority &
The District Revenue Officer,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Economic Offences Wing-II,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.