Skip to content
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.

K.Seni. Vs. the Assistant Engineer and ors.

K.Seni vs The Assistant Engineer and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jul 03, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/928632

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

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

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Writ Petition No.14689 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

K.Seni

Advocate Mr.A.Ramesh Manikandan, Adv.

Respondent

The Assistant Engineer and ors.

Advocate Mr.G.Vasudevan, 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 collect the electricity bill charge till date from the petitioner, on petitioner representation dated 05.03.2012. (the prayer is amended as per order dated 3.7.2012 passed in m.p.no.1 of 2012)order1. this writ petition is filed praying to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the first respondent to collect the electricity bill charge till date from the petitioner, on petitioner representation dated 05.03.2012. (the prayer is amended as per order dated 3.7.2012 passed in m.p.no.1 of 2012)2. mr.g.vasudevan, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. considering the nature of order to be passed in this matter, the notice to the respondents 4 to 6 is dispensed with. by consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.3. the writ petition has been filed to consider the representation dated 5.3.2012 whereby the petitioner has requested the first respondent to collect the electricity bill charges.4. in view of the relief sought for this writ petition, without going into the merits of the petitioner's claim, the first respondent is directed to consider the representation dated 5.3.2012 of the petitioner on its own merits and in accordance with law, expeditiously after giving opportunity to the respondents 4 to 6 so as to avoid the allegation of violation of principles of natural justice. this court has not expressed any opinion on the petitioner's claim.5. the writ petition is disposed of as above. 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 collect the electricity bill charge till date from the petitioner, on petitioner representation dated 05.03.2012. (The prayer is amended as per order dated 3.7.2012 passed in M.P.No.1 of 2012)

ORDER

1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to collect the electricity bill charge till date from the petitioner, on petitioner representation dated 05.03.2012. (The prayer is amended as per order dated 3.7.2012 passed in M.P.No.1 of 2012)

2. Mr.G.Vasudevan, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. Considering the nature of order to be passed in this matter, the notice to the respondents 4 to 6 is dispensed with. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

3. The writ petition has been filed to consider the representation dated 5.3.2012 whereby the petitioner has requested the first respondent to collect the electricity bill charges.

4. In view of the relief sought for this writ petition, without going into the merits of the petitioner's claim, the first respondent is directed to consider the representation dated 5.3.2012 of the petitioner on its own merits and in accordance with law, expeditiously after giving opportunity to the respondents 4 to 6 so as to avoid the allegation of violation of principles of natural justice. This court has not expressed any opinion on the petitioner's claim.

5. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial