Chennai Madurai Court June 2016 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
M. Jegajothi Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, School Ed ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order of Writ Court dated 03.09.2009, made in W.P.(MD)No.2950 of 2005.) K.K. Sasidharan, J. 1. This is a classic case of victimization of a Headmistress, stated to be a spinster, on account of her refusal to comply with the direction of the Management of National Girls Higher Secondary School, Rasipuram, Salem, to promote the children of two influential persons. Even at the age of 74 and 16 years after retirement, this elderly person is still wandering in the corridors of this Court fighting against the mighty State and a highly influential Management of a private School. BRIEF FACTS: 2. The appellant was initially appointed as B.T. Assistant in Nadar Saraswathi Girls High School, Theni, on 05 June, 1963. Subsequently, she joined National Girls Higher Secondary School, as Headmistress on 05 June, 1967. It is the case of the appellant that she refused to promote two girl students who are the wards of two highly ...
R. Nagarajan Vs. The District Collector, Ramanathapuram and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to admit petitioner's son namely N.Ramprasath into 10th standard of M.G.Public School, Devipattinam Road, Ramanathapuram, Ramanthapuram District, the 3rd respondent herein, within the time stipulated by this Honourable Court.) 1. The Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this writ petition. He has also made an endorsement to that effect in the typed set of papers of the writ petition. 2. Recording the aforesaid fact and the endorsement so made, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs....
S. Ayyathurai Vs. The District Collector, Tirunelveli District and Oth ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-30-2016
(Prayer:-Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the impugned auction notice for fishery rights in K.No.Ko.29/E.Po./Karupanadhi/dated 13.06.2016 passed by the 6th respondent in sofar as the Miscellaneous Properties 11, 12 , 13 and 15 are concerned and quash the same.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. According to the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the auction slated on 27.06.2016 at 12.00 noon was not held and it was postponed indefinitely. At this stage, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner brings it to the notice of this Court that on 20.06.2016 in W.P.(MD).No.10807 of 2016 filed by the petitioner, this Court had directed the fourth respondent/Executive Engineer, P.W.D, Chittar Basin Division, Tenkasi, Kutralam to look into the representation of the petitioner, dated 10.06.2016, within 5 days from the date of receipt of ...
T. Palanisamy Vs. The Tahsildar, Thuraiyur Taluka
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to cancel the Patta Nos. 905 and 458 granted in the name of 2nd Respondent in respect of the property of 5 Acres 13 Cents bearing in Survey No. 33/3, 33/3, 34/2, 34/5, 34/9, 34/3 and 34/10 Kombai Village , Vengadathanur Post, Thuraiyur Taluk, Trichy District, by considering petitioner's representation dated 16.4.2016.) 1. The Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner has given a letter, dated 27.06.2016, to the Registry seeking permission of this Court to withdraw this writ petition. 2. Recording the aforesaid letter, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs....
A. Gunasekaran Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to give permission to conduct Cricket Tournament on 03.07.2016, 10.07.2016, 17.07.2016, 24.07.2016 and 31.07.2016 (Sundays) during the celebration of 7th Anniversary of Karisaloor Cricket Club between 9am to 5pm in the petitioner's village, namely, Karisaloor, Tirunelveli District.) 1. The writ petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to give permission to conduct Cricket Tournament on 03.07.2016, 10.07.2016, 17.07.2016, 24.07.2016 and 31.07.2016 (Sundays) during the celebration of 7th Anniversary of Karisaloor Cricket Club between 9am to 5pm in the petitioner's village, namely, Karisaloor, Tirunelveli District. 2. Mr.D.Muruganandam, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. Heard the learned counsel ap...
S. Manimaran, Proprietor, M/s. Manimaran Transport Vs. The Managing Di ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent vide Na.Ka.No.MT 10/11777/2015 dated 20.05.2016 and quash the same and consequently directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to award the contract to the petitioner for Transportation of Stocks for Non-FCI movement for the period from 01.07.2015 to 30.06.2017 without reference condition relating to the criminal cases. 1. The Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner has given a letter, dated 28.06.2016, to the Registry seeking permission of this Court to withdraw this writ petition. 2. Recording the aforesaid letter, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed....
V. Rengaraj Vs. The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the Respondents from terminating the petitioner from working in the capacity of poojari at Arulmigu Vellaimuneeswarar Thirukovil, situated in Ganatharvakottai Taluk, Pudukkottai District, without following the due process of law.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent of both sides, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents 1 and 2. 4. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is a hereditary Poojari of the 'Arulmigu Vellaimuneeswarar Temple' and originally it was owned by the Zameen of Pudukkottai Samasthanam. After amalgamation of the Zameen with the Pudukkottai State, the said Temple is under the administrative control of Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. 5. The specific case of the Petitioner is that after demise of his father...
Vadivambal Vs. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Madurai ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-30-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct the respondent to complete the investigation in Crime No.27 of 2011 dated 11.06.2011 and to file final report within the time frame as fixed by this Hon'ble Court.) 1. This petition has been filed, seeking to direct the respondent to complete the investigation in Crime No.27 of 2011 dated 11.06.2011 and to file final report. 2. According to the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), after completing the investigation in Crime No.27 of 2011, a final report has already been filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai on 13.10.2012, closing the case as mistake of fact. 3. In view of the above submission, this Criminal Original Petition is closed. It is open to the petitioner to work out her remedy before the appropriate forum in the manner known to law....
R. Kottursamy Vs. The District Collector, Tirunelveli District and Oth ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-30-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the impugned auction notice for fishery rights in K.No.9Ko.29/E.Po/Karupanadhi dated 13.06.2016 passed by the 6th respondent in so far as the Miscellaneous Properties 10, 14 and 16 are concerned and quash the same.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. According to the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the auction slated on 27.06.2016 at 12.00 noon was not held and it was postponed indefinitely. At this stage, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner brings it to the notice of this Court that on 20.06.2016 in W.P.(MD).No.10806 of 2016 filed by the petitioner, this Court had directed the fourth respondent/Executive Engineer, P.W.D, Chittar Basin Division, Tenkasi, Kutralam to look into the representation of the petitioner, dated 10.06.2016, within 5 days from the date of receipt of a cop...
M. Kannan Vs. The District Collector, Pudukkottai District and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-30-2016
(Prayer:-Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to issue a Patta to the extent of 3.41.5, 0.40.0 Ares bearing Survey No.35 situated at Nanjai Mangudi Village, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukottai Distirct.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. No counter is filed. 3. According to the Petitioner, he is in possession of wet land bearing Sy.No.35, measuring about 3.41.5, 0.40.0 ares in door No.31, Mangudi Village, Poovattakudi Post, Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukkottai District. From the year 1987, he is in possession of the land and he is cultivating the said land ever since 30.09.1987. For every fasli, he had paid the amount demanded by the Government. As such, he is in possession and enjoyment of the land for the past 30 years. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that he had approached the first and second respondents several times seeking issuance ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »