THIRU.GOVINDASAMY Vs. G.P. BASKARAN, VICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Appeal is directed against the order made in W.P(MD)No.21291 of 2017, dated 20.11.2017.

(2.) The appellant is the third respondent in the Writ Petition. The Writ Petitioner sought for a mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to take action against the third respondent for irregularities in the grant of subsidy, waiver of loans to farmers and misappropriation of funds of the third respondent/Society, as per his representation, dated 12.06.2017.

(3.) According to the Writ Petitioner, the third respondent being the secretary of the said Society misused his powers and has committed gross irregularities in grant of subsidy, waiver of loans to farmers and also misappropriated the funds. Expressing such allegations, the Writ Petitioner preferred a complaint, dated 12.06.2017 before the respondents 1 and 2. When the said complaint was not considered, the above Writ Petition was filed. The Writ Court without expressing any view on the merits of the claim made by the Writ Petitioner, only directed the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner, dated 12.06.2017 and pass appropriate orders, on its own merits and in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, third respondent as well as the other interested parties, if any, within a period of six weeks. Challenging the above said order, the present Writ Appeal is filed by the third respondent by contending that the complaint made by the Writ Petitioner against the appellant did not disclose entire facts and circumstances and on the other hand, it was given only to harass the third respondent/appellant. Therefore, it is contended that the order passed by the Writ Court had caused prejudice to the third respondent/appellant.