T.ThangappA. Vs. the Junior Engineer

T.ThangappA. vs The Junior Engineer

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jun 06, 2012

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/927817

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/927817
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: R.Sudhakar, J.
Decided On: Jun 06, 2012
Case Number: Writ Petition No.11503 of 2012
Subject: Constitution

Case Summary

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

Constitution

Key legal issue: Constitution
Acts & sections: Constitution of India - Articles 226

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

T.ThangappA.

Advocate Mr.R.Sethuvarayar, Adv.

Respondent

The Junior Engineer

Advocate Mr.P.Gunaraj, Adv

Legal References

Acts: Constitution of India - Articles 226

Excerpt

writ petition is filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the first respondent to restore the e.b. service connection in s.c.no.1199 at no.4/80, middle street, keelapalur which was disconnected on 04.04.2012 by the first respondent.order1. learned counsel appearing for the petitioner on instruction states that the relief sought for in this writ petition becomes infructuous and the writ petition may be dismissed as infructuous. he also made an endorsement to that effect. accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. no costs.

Full Judgment

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to restore the E.B. Service Connection in S.C.No.1199 at No.4/80, Middle Street, Keelapalur which was disconnected on 04.04.2012 by the first respondent.

ORDER

1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner on instruction states that the relief sought for in this writ petition becomes infructuous and the writ petition may be dismissed as infructuous. He also made an endorsement to that effect. Accordingly, this Writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2012 Same Parties T.ThangappA. vs The Junior Engineer Same Subject Constitution Same Judge R.Sudhakar, J. Acts & Sections Constitution of India - Articles 226