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.

P.Selvam Vs. Spl Commr for Handicapped

P.Selvam vs Spl Commr for Handicapped

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Feb 04, 2013
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/965249

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
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

P.Selvam

Respondent

Spl Commr for Handicapped

Excerpt

.....petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if the third respondent is directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner, dated 23.1.2012, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period.3. the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents, have no objection for such an order being passed by this court.4. in view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side, the third respondent is directed to dispose of the representation, dated 23.1.2012, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. the petitioner is directed to furnish a copy of the representation, dated 23.1.2012, to the third respondent, along with a copy of this order. however, it is made clear that this court, by this order, has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.5. accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, with the above directions. no costs. 4.2.2013 lan index : yes internet : yes to:1. the special commissioner for handicapped o/o. the state commissioner of disabled, no.15/1 model school road thousand lights, chennai 6 2 the divisional engineer highways and rural works department saidapet, chennai 3 3 the commissioner corporation of chennai, rippon building chennai 3 4 the health officer corporation of chennai, egmore chennai 8 5 the commissioner of police egmore, chennai 8 m.jaichandren j., lan writ petition no.2698 o”4. 2.2013

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:

4. 2.2013 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.2698 of 2013 P.SELVAM [ PETITIONER ] Vs 1 THE SPECIAL COMMISSIONER FOR HANDICAPPED O/O. THE STATE COMMISSIONER OF DISABLED, NO.15/1 MODEL SCHOOL ROAD THOUSAND LIGHTS, CHENNAI 6 2 THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER HIGHWAYS AND RURAL WORKS DEPARTMENT SAIDAPET, CHENNAI 3 3 THE COMMISSIONER CORPORATION OF CHENNAI, RIPPON BUILDING CHENNAI 3 4 THE HEALTH OFFICER CORPORATION OF CHENNAI, EGMORE CHENNAI 8 5 THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE EGMORE, CHENNAI 8 [ RESPONDENTS ] Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to dispose of the petitioner representation dated 23.1.2012 for issuance of Licence for running Bunk Shop on the line of E.V.R. High Road, infront of Rajiv Gandhi Hospital Near by Subway behind C4, Police Station, Chennai 3 and not interfere till date of dispose of the petitioner representation. For petitioner : M/s.Gini Liew Manuel For respondents : Dr.C.Ravichandran for R3 and R4 Mr.R.Vijayakumar AGP,for R1, R2 and R5 O R D E R Mr.R.Vijayakumar, the learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents 1, 2 and 5 and Dr.C.Ravichandran, the learned counsel, takes notice for the respondents 3 and 4.

2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if the third respondent is directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner, dated 23.1.2012, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period.

3. The learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents, have no objection for such an order being passed by this Court.

4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side, the third respondent is directed to dispose of the representation, dated 23.1.2012, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is directed to furnish a copy of the representation, dated 23.1.2012, to the third respondent, along with a copy of this order. However, it is made clear that this Court, by this order, has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, with the above directions. No costs. 4.2.2013 lan INDEX : YES INTERNET : YES To:

1. THE SPECIAL COMMISSIONER FOR HANDICAPPED O/O. THE STATE COMMISSIONER OF DISABLED, NO.15/1 MODEL SCHOOL ROAD THOUSAND LIGHTS, CHENNAI 6 2 THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER HIGHWAYS AND RURAL WORKS DEPARTMENT SAIDAPET, CHENNAI 3 3 THE COMMISSIONER CORPORATION OF CHENNAI, RIPPON BUILDING CHENNAI 3 4 THE HEALTH OFFICER CORPORATION OF CHENNAI, EGMORE CHENNAI 8 5 THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE EGMORE, CHENNAI 8 M.JAICHANDREN J., lan Writ Petition No.2698 o”

4. 2.2013

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial