SIVASUBRAMANIAM Vs. T VELUSAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is preferred against the order dated 12.11.1996 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No. 11552 of 1996, issuing a direction to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Pollachi to decide the proceedings under Section 145, Crl.P.C. on or before 31.12.1996

(2.) NO doubt, in the writ petition initially the petitioner has sought for quashing the order dated 22.7.1996 in M.C.No. 74 of 1996 - Al passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Pollachi extending the period of the order passed under Section 144, Crl.P.C. Subsequently, the prayer came to be amended and the following prayer was sought for: - Pass appropriate Writs, Orders or Directions and more particularly a Writ of Declaration declaring that the order of the 1st respondent bearing G.O.Ms.No.917 Public (Law and Order -A) Department dated 16.8.1996 referred to in the counter affidavit of the first respondent as illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently directing the 1st respondent to communicate the orders in M.C.No. 96 of 1996 issued under Section 145, Crl.P.C, and to pass such further or other orders. It is the amended prayer that has been considered by the learned single Judge. The learned single Judge has held that G.O.Ms.No.917 Public (Law & Order -A) Department dated 16.8.1996 cannot be quashed, because it is in the nature of an innocuous order as the proceedings under section 144, Crl.P.C. are pending.

(3.) AS far as the issuance of mandamus to the Sub -Divisional Magistrate to dispose of the proceedings under Section 144, Crl.P.C. on or before 31.12.1996 is concerned it is not possible to agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that no such direction could have been issued. If a court or an authority fails to discharge its function properly within a reasonable time, mandamus can be issued directing that authority or the Court to perform its function and discharge the duties as required by law within a reasonable time. The same is the position in the instant case.