Madras High Court
WP/29418/2026 of C.RAJA Vs The Registrar General on 17 September 2026
WP No. 29418 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN
WP No. 29418 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA011546372026}
C.Raja
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Registrar General,
Madras High Court,
Chennai 600 104.
2. The District Judge cum Disciplinary Authority Cuddalore, Cuddalore District.
3. The Subordinate Judge cum Enquiry officer Tittagudi, Cuddalore District.
4. The District Munsif cum District Magistrate Kattumannarkoil koil, Cuddalore District.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records relating to the order dated 27.10.2022 in order No 82/2022 passed by 4th respondent and order dated 30.01.2025 in A No 68/2023 passed by the 2nd respondent quash the same and as Null and Void consequential direction to Respondents to reinstatement petitioner in service and back wages with all attendant benefits.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.C.Venkatesan
For Respondent(s):
Mr.M.SANTHANARAMAN
WP No. 29418 of 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The present writ petition has been instituted challenging the order of dismissal from service.
2. Based on the proved charges, the disciplinary authority, namely, the Principal District Judge, Cuddalore, imposed the punishment of dismissal from service. Admittedly, the writ petitioner has not preferred the Statutory Appeal before the High Court. Exhausting the appeal remedy is of paramount important and the petitioner will be getting an opportunity to adjudicate the disputed facts before the Appellate Authority based on documents and evidences available on record.
3. The learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the petitioner has not exhausted the appellate remedy.
4. That being so, the petitioner is at liberty to prefer the Statutory Appeal before the High Court within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the event of filing of any such appeal, the same may be taken on file without reference to delay in filing the appeal and the issues shall be decided on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.
WP No. 29418 of 2026
5. With this liberty, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. (S.M.S.,J.) (K.G.R.,J.) 17-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SLI To
1. The Registrar General, Madras High Court, Chennai 600 104.
2. The District Judge cum Disciplinary Authority Cuddalore, Cuddalore District.
3. The Subordinate Judge cum Enquiry officer Tittagudi, Cuddalore District.
4. The District Munsif cum District Magistrate Kattumannarkoil koil, Cuddalore District.
WP No. 29418 of 2026
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. AND KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN, J. SLI WP No. 29418 of 2026 17-09-2026