Chennai Madurai Court July 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.
R. Soundararajan Vs. N.S. Palaniappan, I.A.S and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-12-2016
(Prayer:-Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act to punish the contemnors for willfully and deliberately disobeying the order of this Honourable Court in WP.(MD).No.7197/2008 dated 27.01.2011.) 1. The Petitioner (party-in-person) is present today before this Court. However, there is representation on the side of the respondents through the Learned Government Advocate. 2. Earlier, this Court, on 27.01.2011 in W.P.(MD).No.7197 of 2008, filed by the petitioner against the State of Tamil Nadu, represented by the Secretary, Public Works Department, Chennai-9 and three others at paragraph No.12 had observed the following: 'As far as the present writ petition is concerned, with the similarly placed persons like that of the petitioner namely K.Raja, S.Solai, M.Karuppiahm M.Subramanian and others and also one V.Narayana who have been given the relaxation in respect of relevant rule for appointment of Work Inspector Grade-II, as per G.O.Ms.No.286, Public Works Depa...
V. Boominathan Vs. The Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Land Ad ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-12-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order made by the fourth respondent by his proceedings in Na.Ka.A1/1357/09, dated 25.03.2009 insofar as it relates to the Petitioner's lands in Plot No.5, Kalaiappa Nagar in S.No.65/26 at Kalanivasal Village, Karaikudi Taluk, Sivagangai District and to quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the 6th respondent to take on file and register the documents in respect of the Petitioner's lands.) 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. 4. The Petitioner has focussed the present Writ Petition before this Court praying for passing of an order by this Court in calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order made by the Fourth Respondent in Na.Ka.No.A1/1357/09, dated ...
Makpooljohn Vs. The District Collector, Madurai District and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-12-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to consider the Petitioner's representation, dated 25.02.2016 pertaining to the issuance of Patta for the land in Resurvey No.204/9, to an extent of 21650 sq.metres, situated at T.S.No.3/12, Ward 'A', Block No.22 in Melur Town, Madurai District, within the time stipulated by this Court.) 1. The Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition. He has also made an endorsement in the Writ Petition to the following effect :- Since the patta has been issued in my name separately, I may be permitted to withdraw this Petition. 2. Recording the aforesaid fact and the endorsement so made, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs....
Sankaranarayanan Vs. The Regional Passport Officer, Government of Indi ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-12-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent issued in Letter No.1300050-CPC-MDU, dated 22.4.2016 and to quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the first respondent to follow the Notification issued by the Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs in G.S.R.No.570(E), dated 25.08.1993 and in the light of the order dated 27.5.2010 passed by this Court in W.P(MD)No.6623 of 2010.) 1. The Petitioner focussed the instant Writ Petition praying for passing of an order by this Court in calling for the records of the First Respondent issued in Letter No.1300050-CPC-MDU, dated 22.04.2016 and to quash the same as illegal one and further he has prayed to adhere to the notification issued by the Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs in G.S.R.No.570(E), dated 25.08.1993 and in the light of the order, dated 27.05.2010 passed by ...
R. Paramasivan and Others Vs. The Managing Director, State Express Tra ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-12-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to settle the petitioner terminal benefits such as commutation of pension, employees provident fund, surrender leave salary, social security scheme benefits, employees retirement benefits fund benefits, medical, engineering and polytechnic colleges contributions difference of gratuity along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum.) 1. The petitioner was an employee of the respondent Transport Corporation. Seeking his retirement benefits, he has filed the present Writ Petition. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the issue is covered by a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD).Nos.383 to 457 of 2015, dated 12.06.2015. He has further submitted that the respondents would consider the request of the petitioner in the light of the judgment passed by the Hon...
M/s. Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd, Rep. by its Authorised Signator ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-12-2016
(Prayer: W.P.(MD).Nos.12174 to 12777 of 2016: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 1st respondent in his proceedings in TIN No.33305563701/2012-13 and 2013-2014 and quash the order dated 17.03.2016 as it is unlawful and further direct the 1st respondent to grant an opportunity for adjudication and thereafter to pass order afresh in all perspective on its merits in terms of the decision of this Hon'ble Court reported in 9 VST 478/2007.) CommonOrder: 1. Since the issue involved in all the Writ Petitions is one and the same, these matters are taken up together and disposed of, by this common order. 2. M/s. Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd, represented by its Authorised Signatory, Mr. Jeyendra Govindlal Shah, Tirunelveli Junction, challenges the impugned orders, dated 17.03.2016, passed by the first respondent, on the ground that the notice, dated 25.05.2015 was not properly ...
S. Vadamalai Raj Vs. The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Chari ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-12-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order issued by the second respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.1803/2014/A3, dated 29.6.2016 and to quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents herein from in any way dispossessing the Petitioner from his house property situated at Door No.51, Ward No.19, Varadarajapuram East Street, Cumbum, Theni District.) 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. 4. According to the Petitioner, his father Late. Subramania Pillai was a tenant in the house property, more particularly, Door No.51, Ward No.19, Varadarajapuram, East Street, Cumbum, Uthamapalayam Taluk, Theni District for the past 40 years. As a matter of fact, the house belongs to the Third Respondent/Arulmighu...
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-12-2016
M. Venugopal, J. 1. Heard the Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner/Trust/College. 2. According to the Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner/Trust/College, the impugned order dated 04.07.2016 of the Fifth Respondent/Dean (Agriculture) and Chairman Admissions, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamilnadu, in withholding the admission for the first year B.Sc., (Agriculture) programme of the Petitioner's College for the academic year 2016 2017, on the ground that there is no permanent infrastructure facilities in the campus and further, the temporary infrastructure facilities available in the campus are poor and inadequate for the students' intake etc., is per se illegal, arbitrary and the same is liable to be set aside in furtherance of substantial cause of justice. 3. Advancing his argument, the Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner/Trust/College urges before this Court that the impugned order of the Fifth Respondent/Dean (Agriculture) and Chairman Admissions,...
Thirunavukarasu Vs. The Secretary to Government, Department of Municip ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-12-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the fourth respondent to appoint the petitioner as Fitter in the fourth respondent's office.) 1. Learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this Writ Petition to which he also circulated a letter to the Registry seeking withdrawal of this Writ Petition, apart from making an endorsement, in the bundle. 2. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed....
T. Johnraj Vs. The Sub-Registrar, Kulathur @ Keeranur, Pudukkottai Dis ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-12-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the Respondent in Letter No.3 of 2016, dated 23.6.2016 and to quash the same as illegal and arbitrary at once.) 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 Respondent. 4. According to the Petitioner, he and his brother's wife Mrs. Mercy formed a partnership firm on 27.01.1999 and purchased the property measuring an extent of 5 acres in various sub-divisions of S.No.488 and purchased the property in question through a Court Auction Sale. Delivery Application was filed in E.A.No.38 of 2000 in E.P.No.142 of 1985 in High Court C.S.No.235 of 1978 and the delivery was recorded. 5. The real grievance of the Petitioner is that, to his shock and surprise, had received a communication in Letter No.3 of 2016, dated 23.06.2016 from the Respo...
- ‹ Prev
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- Next ›
- Last »