Skip to content
Try for free
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.
See full guide →

The Management Vs P.Mahendran

The Management vs P.Mahendran

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Jun 30, 2025
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1841368

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
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP/9718/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

The Management

Respondent

P.Mahendran

Excerpt

.....respondents : mr.durai gunasekaran for r1 : mr.l.s.m.hasan fizal additional government pleader for r2orderthe petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 07.08.2018 passed by the second respondent in the approval petition no.23 of 2015.2. when the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counselappearing for the petitioner submits that the first respondent has already filed a writ petition in w.p.no.18980 of 2015 and the same is pending, challenging the dismissal order and approval petition is not required for the 3rd respondent. this writ petition is filed challenging the order passed by the second respondent in the approval petition. since the first respondent has already filed the writ petition challenging the dismissal order and the approval petition is not applicable to the first respondent, this writ petition may be closed.3. recording the above said submissions, this writ petition is closed. no costs. consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 30.06.2025 index : yes/nospeaking order/non-speaking orderneutral citation case: yes/no vv to the special joint commissioner of labour, dms campus, anna salai, chennai.p.dhanabal, j.vv 30.06.2025

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 30.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.DHANABAL and WMP.No.9445 of 2022 The Management, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Salem) Limited, Bharathipuram, Salem Main Road, Dharmapuri-636 705. ... Petitioner vs.

1. P.Mahendran, S/o.Puttan, Gandhipuram Street, Arampatti Post, Pochampalli Taluk, Krishnagiri District-636 206.

2. The Special Joint Commissioner of Labour, DMS Campus, Anna Salai, Chennai. ... Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the order dated 07.08.2018 passed by the second respondent in Approval Petition No.23 of 2015 and quash the same, consequently direct the second respondent to approve the order of the petitioner dated 22.01.2015 dismissing the first respondent from service. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Aswin

For Respondents : Mr.Durai Gunasekaran for R1 : Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal Additional Government Pleader for R2

ORDER

The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 07.08.2018 passed by the second respondent in the Approval Petition No.23 of 2015.

2. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner submits that the first respondent has already filed a writ petition in W.P.No.18980 of 2015 and the same is pending, challenging the dismissal order and Approval Petition is not required for the 3rd respondent. This writ petition is filed challenging the order passed by the second respondent in the approval petition. Since the first respondent has already filed the writ petition challenging the dismissal order and the approval petition is not applicable to the first respondent, this Writ Petition may be closed.

3. Recording the above said submissions, this Writ Petition is closed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 30.06.2025 Index : Yes/No

Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order

Neutral Citation Case: Yes/No Vv To The Special Joint Commissioner of Labour, DMS Campus, Anna Salai, Chennai.

P.DHANABAL, J.

Vv 30.06.2025

Continue Your Research

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2025 Same Parties The Management vs P.Mahendran Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice P. Dhanabal

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales