Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 143 To 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 152 NOMINAL INDEX Sri K.Venkatesh v. The Principal Secretary to Government and Ors, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 143 M/s Bagalkot Cement & Industries Ltd vs The Chairperson, Micro Small and Medium Enterprises and Anr., 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 144 S.Sujatha vs The Director Of Collegiate Education, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad)...
Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 143 To 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 152
NOMINAL INDEX
Sri K.Venkatesh v. The Principal Secretary to Government and Ors, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 143
M/s Bagalkot Cement & Industries Ltd vs The Chairperson, Micro Small and Medium Enterprises and Anr., 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 144
S.Sujatha vs The Director Of Collegiate Education, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 145
V Syril Sundaraj v The Presiding Officer and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 146
M. Anantha Babu vs. The District Collector & Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 147
Pandiammal vs Commissioner, Social Welfare and Women Empowerment Department & Ors, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 148
S. Keerthana v. The Commissioner of Milk Production and Dairy Development Department & Ors., 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 149
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Bar Association (MMBA) v A Radhakrishnan and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 150
S Mariaselvi v AS Mani and Ors, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 151
Sivakumar TD v State of Tamil Nadu, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 152
REPORT
Case Title: Sri K.Venkatesh v. The Principal Secretary to Government and Ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 143
The Madras High Court recently opined against giving police protection to persons with criminal backgrounds as it would send a wrong signal to society and would make people lose their faith in the existing system.
Justice Anand Venkatesh added that courts must be very circumspect to grant police protection to any person with a criminal background. The court added that even if some persons with criminal backgrounds are given police protection, the same could not be taken as a precedent by the courts.
Case Title: M/s Bagalkot Cement & Industries Ltd vs The Chairperson, Micro Small and Medium Enterprises and Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 144
The Madras High Court single bench of Justice R. N. Manjula held that the imposition of three times of the bank rate of interest on the award amount by the Micro Small and Medium Enterprises, Facilitation Council is violation of fundamental principles of reasonableness and fairness. It held that the Petitioner is indirectly deprived of his appeal remedy in view of such high rate of interest.
The High Court emphasized the importance of ensuring that the right to challenge the award remains realistic and accessible. It criticized the imposition of excessive interest, which effectively closes the door to challenging the award, thereby indirectly depriving the petitioner of their appeal remedy. The High Court condemned such actions as contrary to the fundamental principles of justice.
Case Name: S.Sujatha vs The Director Of Collegiate Education
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 145
A single judge bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Honourable Mrs. Justice L. Victoria Gowri while deciding Writ Petitions in the case of S. Sujatha vs The Director of Collegiate Education has held that age relaxation can be provided to a person to compete in the recruitment process by giving the weightage for having been engaged or worked in the department for a significant period of time.
Case Title: V Syril Sundaraj v The Presiding Officer and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 146
The Madras High Court full bench has recently observed that the State Express Transport Corporation management which had taken a stand before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) supporting the bus driver involved in an accident was not precluded from initiating disciplinary proceedings against the same driver.
The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala, Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy, and Justice V Lakshminarayan observed that the MACT did not have jurisdiction to arrive at the liability of the driver and was only concerned with the claim. The court thus opined that if submission before the MACT was to preclude the management from taking disciplinary proceedings, it would be enlarging the scope of the MACT which was beyond the scope of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Case Title: M. Anantha Babu vs. The District Collector & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 147
A single judge bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Justice R.N. Manjula while deciding a writ petition in the case of M. Anantha Babu v. The District Collector & Ors. has reiterated that compassionate appointment cannot be denied solely on the ground that the child was from the second wife of the deceased employee.
The court observed that legitimate children born out of void marriage have been recognised by law itself. The court relied on the judgement of Union of India and Ors. Vrs. V. K. Tripathi wherein the Supreme Court had observed that a child of a second wife of an employee could not be denied for compassionate appointment on that ground alone.
Contract Appointment Of Protection Officer, Can't Continue Beyond Term: Madras High Court
Case Title: Pandiammal vs Commissioner, Social Welfare and Women Empowerment Department & Ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 148
A single judge bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Justice G.K.Ilanthiraiyan while deciding a Civil Writ Petition in the case of Pandiammal vs Commissioner, Social Welfare and Women Empowerment Department & Ors has held that Protection Officer appointed on contract basis cannot be termed to be appointed under Rule 3(3) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Rules, 2006 (DV Rules) merely because she was allowed to continue her service after completion of tenure of contract.
The court also observed that the post of Protection Officer under DV Act was not governed by any service rules of the Government and governed as per the terms of contractual agreement of the incumbents. Such a contact could be terminated before the completion of one year on the ground of unsatisfactory service on the candidate or when it is felt that continued employment is unnecessary.
Case Title: S. Keerthana v. The Commissioner of Milk Production and Dairy Development Department & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 149
A single judge bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Justice R. Vijayakumar while deciding a writ petition in the case of S. Keerthana v. The Commissioner of Milk Production and Dairy Development Department & Ors. has held that a near relative of an officer of a co-operative society cannot be appointed to any post in the service of such society.
Case Title: Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Bar Association (MMBA) v A Radhakrishnan and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 150
The Madras High Court has recently modified an earlier order and restored the power of the Madurai Bench to hear pan-state matters.
The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice R Hemalatha felt that it would not be appropriate to limit hearing of pan-state matters to the principal bench especially when the Central Government notification for setting up the Madurai bench did not have any such classification. The court however added that the Chief Justice would continue to have the administrative powers to transfer cases from the Madurai bench to the principal seat.
Case Title: S Mariaselvi v AS Mani and Ors
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 151
The Madras High Court has asked the media to be more cautious while making allegations, especially sexual allegations, against religious leaders as the same not only affects the administration of the institutions but will also create a false image against such religious leaders.
Justice KK Ramakrishnan of the Madurai bench pointed out that reputation was an element of personal security that was protected by the constitution. The court also remarked that a man, whose reputation was hurt, was half-dead. Highlighting the importance of untainted reputation, the judge also remarked that it was the purest treasure of life.
The court also considered it appropriate to put forward some suggestions to the press in the interest of individual reputation, press freedom and society. The court suggested the press council to frame proper guidelines to publish materials relating to the personal life of an individual after proper verification. The court added that proper verification meant that the materials should be collected with concrete information and from a true source. The court further said that the publisher should publish the information after taking due deliberation, and steps that he would take in his own case.
Case Title: Sivakumar TD v State of Tamil Nadu
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 152
The Madras High Court has asked the State government to not insist on the production of medical examination reports and sexual re-orientation surgery certificates for publishing a change of name or gender of transpersons in the official gazette.
The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Sathya Narayana Prasad added that the State should rely on the self-declaration forms and affidavits filed by trans persons and if needed, could ask for the Aadhar card or other valid ID document for publication in the official gazette. The Court also asked the State Social Welfare Department to follow the same procedure while issuing ID cards to trans persons.
The Court was hearing a plea filed by Sivakumar TD, an LGBTQ rights activist, and co-founder of Nirangal, a non-profit organization focusing on gender and sexuality rights. Sivakumar had argued that the procedure adopted by the State for publishing a change of name or gender in the official gazette was unlawful and against the laws laid down by the Apex Court.
OTHER DEVELOPMENTS
Case Title: The Kennel Club of India v The Union of India and Others
Case No: WP 8927 of 2024
The Madras High Court temporarily stayed the Central Government on 12th March 2024, prohibiting the import, breeding, and selling of dogs classified as ferocious and dangerous to human life.
Justice Anita Sumanth granted the interim stay on a plea filed by the Kennel Club of India seeking to quash the central government's circular.
On March 12, 2014, the Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying Department of the Government of India issued a circular saying that an expert committee had recommended a ban on the import breeding, and selling of certain breeds of dogs classified as ferocious and dangerous to human life. The circular further said that the dogs which were already kept as pets shall be sterilized to stop further breeding.
The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam party has approached the Madras High Court questioning the design of the third generation M3 Electronic Voting Machines ahead of the upcoming Assembly Elections 2024.
The plea, moved through the Organisation Secretary RS Bharathi, says that the present model, in which the Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) is placed between the Balloting Unit and the Control Unit could pave the way for discrepancies and corrupt practices in the election. The plea also says that fixing the Symbol Loading Unit (SLU) in the VVPAT is in clear violation of the Conduct of Election Rules.
Expedite Probe, Trials In Criminal Cases Against MPs, MLAs: Madras High Court To State
Case Title: Suo Motu v State of Tamil Nadu and Others
Case No: WP 16154 of 2020
The Madras High Court has directed the State to expedite the probe and trial in criminal cases pending against MPs and MLAs in the State.
The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice J Sathya Narayana Prasad gave directions on a suo moto petition undertaken by the court in 2020 to monitor the progress of criminal cases against the MPs and MLAs.
The Advocate General PS Raman had informed the court that 561 cases were pending against MPs and MLAs in the State for offenses under the Indian Penal Code and other Acts. With respect to cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the court was informed that 20 cases were pending at the stage of trial and nine were under investigation. It was also informed that nine cases were at an advanced stage of trial.
Case Title: M/s S Pukal Vadivu v State
Case No: Crl OP 8089 of 2024
The Madras High Court on Thursday wondered how a case under the Juvenile Justice Act could be filed against the headmistress of a school for taking the students to see PM Modi's road show in Coimbatore. The court had previously directed the police not to take any coercive action against the school management.
Justice G Jayachandran also remarked that the police should not end up filing criminal cases against school management as a knee-jerk reaction to media reports. The court also remarked that filing criminal cases against the school for such incidents will have a large-scale impact on the future participation of children in political rallies.
The court was hearing a plea filed by a headmistress of a school in Coimbatore for quashing a criminal case registered against the school management for allegedly taking 32 school students in uniform to see the roadshow conducted by PM Modi in Coimbatore on March 18, 2024. The police had registered cases for the offenses under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 based on a complaint by the District Child Protection Officer.
The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry has written to the Chief Justice of Madras High Court- Justice SV Gangapurwala requesting the CJ and the Collegium judges to consider the names of candidates hailing from different sections of the society including minorities while recommending names for elevation to the bench and to give adequate representation to ensure socio economic justice and social diversity in the Higher Judiciary.
The letter points out that the High Court is currently functioning with a strength of 66 Judges as against the sanctioned strength of 75 judges, of which a couple of judges are set to attain superannuation this year. Thus, the Council said that it is high time to fill the vacancy of the judges for speedy delivery of justice to the litigants and the public at large. At this juncture, the letter says that while recommending names to be considered for elevation to the higher judiciary, the High Court Collegium may consider providing equal opportunity to all the eligible and suitable aspirants from all sections of advocates who have well-trained legal minds.