Union Council Vs. P. K. Muthusamy & Ors.  INSC 1290 (27 July 2009)
COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal
(Civil) No(s).12587/2008 (From the judgement and order dated 19/02/2008 in WP
No. 30663/2007 of The HIGH COURT OF MADRAS) PRES.,PANCHAYAT UNION COUNCIL
Petitioner(s) VERSUS P.K.MUTHUSAMY & ORS. Respondent(s) (With appln(s) for
permission to place addl. documents on record and prayer for interim relief and
office report )) Date: 27/07/2009 This Petition was called on for hearing
MR. JUSTICE MARKANDEY KATJU HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASOK KUMAR GANGULY For
Petitioner(s) Ms. N. Shoba,Adv.
Ram J Thalapathy, Adv.
Respondent(s) Mr. V.Prabhakar, Adv.for Mrs.Revathy Raghavan,Adv.
hearing counsel the Court made the following
Appeal is allowed in terms of the Reportable signed order.
as to costs.
Kr. Chawla) ( Indu Satija) Court Master Court Master [Reportable Signed Order
is placed on the File] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE
JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.4774 OF 2009 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Civil)
No.12587 of 2008) President, Panchayat Union Council ..Appellant versus
P.K.Muthusamy & Others ..Respondents ORDER Leave granted.
learned counsel for the appellants.
Appeal, by grant of special leave, has been filed against the impugned judgment
of the High Court of Madras dated 19th February, 2008.
appears that some accommodation was required for the District
Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court at Pennagaram Taluk, Dharmapuri District,
Tamil Nadu. By the impugned order, the High Court has directed that the Old
Block Development Office building shall be allotted for the aforesaid Court.
view, it was not within the jurisdiction of the High Court to pass the
aforesaid order. We can understand the High Court's concern that there should
be proper accommodation for the Munsif's Court, but for that -2- purpose the
High Court can only make a request to the Government and not direct the
Government to allot or give a particular land or building which belongs to the
government or to anyone else. This Court has been repreatedly saying that the
judiciary should not ordinarily encroach into the domain of the executive or
legislature, vide Divisional Manager, Aravali Gold Club & Another vs.
Chander Hass & Another, (2008) 1 SCC 683, Common Cause vs. Union of India,
(2008) 5 SCC 511, etc. There must be restraint in these matters on the part of
confident that if the judiciary makes a request to the Government, the
Government will consider that request with great respect and take suitable
steps for the smooth functioning of the Court. However, but in such matters,
the Court cannot direct the government to allot a particular land or building
for that purpose.
we accept this appeal; set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court and
request the Chief Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu to discuss the matter with the
Registrar General of the High Court so as to resolve the problem as early as
possible, preferably within a period of two months' from today. No order as to
is directed to send a copy of this order to -3- the Chief Secretary, State of
Tamil Nadu as well as Registrar General of the Madras High Court.
..........................J. [MARKANDEY KATJU]
Pages: 1 2 3