P. Ragunathan and Others Vs. The Assistant Director of Handloom Textiles and Others

P. Ragunathan and Others vs The Assistant Director of Handloom Textiles and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Oct 27, 2015

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1179134

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1179134
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: M. Jaichandren
Decided On: Oct 27, 2015
Case Number: Writ Petition Nos. 27733, 28923 & 30419 of 2012
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

P. Ragunathan and Others

Respondent

The Assistant Director of Handloom Textiles and Others

Excerpt

(prayer: this writ petition is filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned notice dated 1.9.2012 issued by the second respondent herein, quash the same.) the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the writ petition may be dismissed as infructuous. he had also made an endorsement to that effect. in view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous. no costs. connected m.p.nos.1 and 2 of 2012 are closed.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned notice dated 1.9.2012 issued by the second respondent herein, quash the same.)

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the writ petition may be dismissed as infructuous. He had also made an endorsement to that effect.

In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Connected M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2012 are closed.

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2015 Same Parties P. Ragunathan and Others vs The Assistant Director of Handloo... Same Subject Education Same Judge M. Jaichandren