Chennai Court April 2006 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.
Angelus Vs. the Director of Elementary Education,
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-13-2006
Reported in: (2006)2MLJ479
ORDERN. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.1. Petitioner seeks to quash the order of the second respondent dated 9 .8.2005 and to direct the respondents to pay pension and all attendant benefits with effect from his date of retirement i.e., 5.6.1988 together with interest at 24% p.a. for the delay in payment.2. The brief facts of the case as stated in the affidavit are that the petitioner joined duty as Headmaster in the Panchayat Union Elementary School, Ponnalikootai on 17.8.1964 and on 25.2.1988, due to his ill-health, he gave a letter seeking voluntary retirement, giving three months statutory notice. The said letter informing voluntary retirement was issued to the second respondent on 26.2.1988 and the postal acknowledgment in this regard is also filed in the typed set of papers. Petitioner states that no order either accepting or rejecting the voluntary retirement was passed by the second respondent. After the expiry of petitioner's medical leave on 31.5.1988, on the advise of the department,...
K. Rajamanickam (D) and anr. Vs. Periyar Self Respect Propaganda Insti ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-13-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Mad25
ORDERS.R. Singharavelu, J.1. This civil revision petition arises against the order and decretal order dated 26.4.1999 made in LA. No. 511 of 1996 in O.S. No. 556 of 1991 on the file of the Principal Sub-Judge, Tiruchirapalll.2. The plaintiffs 1 and 3 are the Revision Petitioners in a suit filed by them against the respondents 1 and 2 (a) for the removal of the second Respondent/second defendant (Thiru. R. Veeramani) as the Secretary of the first Respondent/first defendant institution (Periyar Self Respect Propaganda Institution, Tiruchirapalli) and to appoint a new Secretary in his place; (b) vesting all properties of the first respondent Institution detailed in the schedule with the new management; (c) directing accounts and enquiries; (d) to settle a scheme for the proper conduct of the institution and have the same administered under the control of the Sub-Court, Trichy.3. The said suit was filed under Section 32 of C.P.C.; construing the first respondent/first defendant as a Trust....
C. Manjula Vs. Mr. Anandkumar, Sub Collector and Mr. Ponnuswami,tahsil ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: (2006)2MLJ423
ORDERC. Nagappan, J.1. The petitioner prays for punishing the respondents for wilful disobedience of the order of interim injunction, dated 16.12.2005, granted in WPMP. No. 43094 of 2005 in W.P. No. 40183 of 2005.2. The case of the petitioner is that she is the absolute owner of the property bearing Door No. 37/17-A, Plot No. 91, T.S. No. 11/2A2, Kamaraj Colony, Second Street, Hosur, Krishnagiri and she derives title to the same through registered sale deed, dated 3.11.2003, by which she purchased the property from her vendor, who had purchased the same from Hosur Co-operative House Building Society Limited under duly registered sale deeds dated 12.6.1973 and 24.9.1979 and she had put up construction in the property, after demolishing the building which stood thereon, as per the duly approved Plan of the Hosur Urban Development Authority and the Commissioner, Hosur Municipality and the property was also assessed to property tax by the Hosur Municipality and there was no encroachment wh...
A. Karunanidhi Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Its Secretary ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: (2006)2MLJ494
ORDERN. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.1. Prayer in the writ petition is to quash the G.O.(MS) No. 276, dated 17 .11.2005 and direct the respondent to revise the panel prepared for the year 1997-1998 for inclusion of petitioner's name in the appropriate place i.e., between S.Rajendran and S.Chandrasekaran in the panel prepared for the year 2003-2004. 2. Petitioner entered into the service of Public Works Department after selection by the Public Service Commission as Assistant Engineer in the year 1980. He was proceeded under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, based on a charge, which was subsequently dropped. However, due to the issuance of charge memo under Rule 17(b), petitioner was not given promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer by the Promotion Committee during the year 1997. The reason given for non-consideration of petitioner' s name for inclusion in the panel was due to the pendency of the disciplinary proceeding. According to the p...
E. Kannan Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Secretary to t ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: (2006)2MLJ590
ORDERN. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.1. In this writ petition, petitioner seeks to quash the order of the second respondent dated 3.12.2005 cancelling the appointment of petitioner.2. Petitioner appeared for selection of Police Constables recruitment conducted during 2001-2003 and the petitioner was placed in the waiting list of MBC at Sl. No. 74 vide the list published on 10.6.2003. Since the petitioner was not given appointment order, he appeared for subsequent selection held in the year 2005. On 30.6.2005, petitioner was issued with an appointment order by the second respondent based on the petitioner's placement in the waiting list prepared at the time of selection in 2001-2003. Petitioner was sent to Police Recruit School, Vellore, for training. According to the petitioner, on 10.11.2005, at 8.00 p.m., petitioner was brought to Chennai along with some other Police personnel and on 11.11.2005 he was made to give a statement before the Deputy Commissioner of Police, St.Thomas Mount, Chenna...
Dr. G. Rajendran Vs. the Secretary to Government, Health and Family We ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: (2006)2MLJ686
ORDERN. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.1. The prayer in the writ petition is to quash the order issued in G.O.(D) No. 863, dated 16.7.96 imposing the punishment of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect.2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the writ petition are that the petitioner, while working as Assistant Medical Officer in Government Primary Health Centre, Edapalli, Nilgris District, was issued with a show cause notice stating that on 8.5.1995 at 4.00 p.m., when the Secretary to the Government came for inspection, the petitioner was not on duty. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 06.06.1995 and stated that on 08.5.1995 at about 12.00 noon, his health condition being not alright, he applied for leave to the In-charge Medical Officer and left the office at 1.00.p.m. and the said leave was also sanctioned by the competent authority. A charge memo was issued by the second respondent on 04.12.1995 under Rule 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Disciplin...
Jamals Enterprises (Pvt) Ltd. Director, Mr. S.C.M. Jamaldeen, Vs. Mrs. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2699
ORDERM. Jeyapaul, J.1. The petition is filed seeking quashment of the criminal proceedings in C.C.No. 1259 of 2002 pending on the file of the learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.2. The petitioners are the accused in a case under Sections 198, 403, 406, 409, 417, 418, 420, 447 and 448 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.3. The respondent has filed a private complaint alleging as follows:-The complainant was the sole and absolute owner of the land bearing Door No. 3, Lady Madhavan Road, Mahalingapuram, Chennai-34. She entered into an agreement dated 29.5.2000 with the accused who are the builders. The complainant also executed power of attorney on 1.6.2000 in favour of the accused authorising them to promote the land of the complainant. The accused did not put up the elevation as desired by the complainant in the land. Only after persistent demands made by the complainant, the accused modified the elevation. She cancelled the power of attorney granted in favour of th...
V. Kanagasabapathy Vs. the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Villupu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: (2006)2MLJ489
ORDERN. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.1. Prayer in the writ petition is the quash the proceedings of the first respondent dated 24.6.2005 and direct the respondents to drop all further action in PR No. 44/2005 with all consequential monetary and service benefits.2. The brief facts as stated in the affidavit are that the petitioner joined the Police service as direct Sub Inspector of Police in the year 1987 and was promoted as Inspector of Police in the year 1999. According to the petitioner, he received several rewards for his efficient services and he was subjected to only three minor punishments. On 24.6.2005, the first respondent issued a charge memo in PR. 44/05 under Rule 3(b) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services ( Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955. The allegations in the charge memo was that on 23.1.2005, petitioner threatened one Kumar @ Rajkumar at his residence at 12.35 to give evidence in his favour in Crime No. 4 of 2 000 before the competent Court and also threatened his ...
The Sennampatty Milk Producers Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. the Presi ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-2006
Reported in: (2006)IILLJ817Mad
P. Sathasivam, J.1. The above Writ Appeal has been filed against the order of the learned single Judge, dated 24.08.1999, in W.P. No. 11590 of 1991, in and by which, the learned Judge confirmed the award passed by the Labour Court and dismissed the Writ Petition. 2. For convenience, we shall refer the parties as arrayed before the learned single Judge. 3. The second respondent, viz., T.Dharmalingam, was employed as Secretary of the Sennampatty Milk Producers' Co-operative Society Limited/Writ petitioner-appellant. He was suspended for misconduct on 27.09.1983. A show cause notice was issued on 21.06.1984 alleging that he had misappropriated a sum of Rs.1,429/-. The second respondent submitted his explanation. An enquiry was conducted and pursuant to the finding of the Enquiry Officer, the second respondent was dismissed from service on 23.08.1984. Aggrieved by the same, the second respondent raised an industrial dispute before the Labour Court, Coimbatore, in I.D. No. 73 of 1985. Befor...
V.N. Dharmakrishnan Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Transport and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-10-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Mad340
ORDERR. Banumathi, J.1. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner seeks for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the First Respondent himself to conduct an enquiry without insisting upon the Second and Third Respondents to do so with regard to the vehicles bearing Registration Numbers TN-67-S-4069 and TN-59-4488 under the custody of the Fifth Respondent.2. Case of the Petitioner is that:The Petitioner is a Councillor for Ward No. 41 in Rajapalayam Municipality. The Fifth Respondent is alleged to have formed 'Nanbargal Narpani Mandram', which according to the Petitioner has been formed with an object to extract money from the Public by illegal means. The Fifth Respondent is having two ambulances in the name of 'Mappillai Vinayakar Ambulance Service' with Registration No. TN-67-S-4069 and TN-59-B-4488. Both the vehicles are not properly registered as ambulance. Further, the registration number of the vehicles are also fake. The Fifth Respondent has also not obtained any certificate from ...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »