BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25/01/2006 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI W.P.No.100 of 2006 and W.P.M.P.Nos.99 & 100 2006 S.Rakkammal ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Secretary Q 876 Mallakinar Primary Agricultural, Co-op. Bank Ltd., Mallankinaru, Virudhunagar 626 109. 2.The Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Virudhunagar. ... Respondents PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records relating to the letter dated 23.05.2005 issued by the first respondent and quash the same and direct the respondents to return the movable properties seized on 12.05.2005 in the petitioner's house namely philips colour Television and two brass vessels to the petitioner. !For Petitioner ... Mr.D.Malaichamy ^For Respondent ... Mr.V.Vivekanandan Government Advocate :ORDER
Learned Special Government Pleader is directed to takes notice on behalf
of the respondents.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned
Special Government Pleader, appearing for the respondent. By consent of both the
counsel, the writ petition itself is taken up for final hearing.
3. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated
23.05.2005 issued by the first respondent.
4. A perusal of the impugned letter would show that this is a reply to the
legal notice issued by the lawyer on behalf of the first respondent. On the face
of it, the writ petition is not maintainable. Article 226 of the Constitution of
India cannot be pressed into service for the purpose of challenging a legal
notice issued by the learned counsel. Therefore, the writ petition is
unsustainable and the same is dismissed.
5. However, the learned counsel for the petition would state that the
movable properties have been attached by the respondents. Therefore, The
petitioner is permitted to make a representation to the respondents. The
dismissal of the writ petition is not a bar for the petitioner to make a
representation to the first respondent to return the movable property.
6. With the above observation, the writ petition is dismissed.
Consequently, the connected W.P.M.Ps. are also dismissed. There is no order as
to costs.
nbk
To
1.The Secretary
Q 876 Mallakinar Primary Agricultural,
Co-op. Bank Ltd.,
Mallankinaru,
Virudhunagar 626 109.
2.The Joint Registrar,
Co-operative Societies,
Virudhunagar.