NADAR MAHAJANA SANGATN S VELLAICHAMY NADAR COLLEGE MADURAI Vs. DISTRICT REGISTRAR ADMINISTRATION SOCIETIES MADURAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH the writ miscellaneous petitions relating to these three writ petitions, which are connected have alone been posted today for disposal, by consent of all parties, I heard all the counsel on the main writ petitions themselves and accordingly I am disposing of the main writ petitions.

(2.) NO doubt, disposal of these main writ petitions will not automatically dispose of one writ miscellaneous petition posted in the list, that is W. M. P. NO. 15625 of 1994 in W. P. NO. 9432 of 1994 since the said w. M. P. seeks punishment for perjury said to have been committed by the 1st respondent in the said writ petition. Hence the said W. M. P. will have to be posted separately later.

(3.) ON the other hand, leaned counsel for respondents 3 and 4 argues that the 1st respondent has got jurisdiction to pass the abovesaid impugned orders. The said counsel also argues that even assuming that the abovesaid impugned orders dated 22. 4. 1994 could not be characterised as an order under Sec. 28, it should also be treated as an order passed under sec. 36 (9 ).