Chennai Court July 2011 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.
A.Kaliappan Vs. the Manager and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2011
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to entertain the petitioner's application for his daughter's loan application for the Educational Loan for the course fee for Teacher Training Course in Beattie Memorial Teacher Training Institute at Ranipet for the years 2010 to 2012 and sanction the same. 2. Mr.V.Ramalingam, learned Counsel takes notice for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. The petitioner claims to be a coolie and he has three children and states that he belonged to down-trodden community. The petitioner approaches the respondent Bank for Educational Loan for his daughter namely K.Venmani Devi to pursue the course at Beattie Memorial Teacher Training Institute at Ranipet. The request for grant of Educational Loan was not considered by the respondents orally stating that there is a loan which remains unpaid by the petitioner - the father of the girl. The ot...
K.Ammayappan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2011
1. This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner, who is a member of the school committee of Murugan Elementary School, Punalveli Post, Rajapalayam Taluk, Virudhunagar District, for a direction against the second respondent, the District Elementary Educational Officer, Virudhunagar, to initiate action in accordance with Section 53(A)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Recognized Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973 [hereinafter referred to as the Act ] in respect of the affairs of the fourth respondent school. 2. According to the petitioner, the third respondent was not a duly elected Secretary of the school committee of Murugan Elementary School, since the educational agency consisting of the petitioner as well as the third respondent and others have never nominated the third respondent as a Secretary of the school committee and, therefore, there has been a genuine dispute regarding the nomination of the third respondent as the Secretary of the school committee. 3. It is stated by the learned cou...
V.Venkatachalam and anr. Vs. the Commissioner and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2011
1. The present appeal is directed against the order made in W.P.(MD) No.1992 of 2007, dated 16.11.2010, by the learned Single Judge in a batch of Writ Petitions. 2. The issue involved in this case is that in respect of the appellant, the Municipal Corporation has made a demand in respect of land tax. In the meantime, the writ petitioner has made an application without paying the land tax demanded for the purpose of putting up a construction. While considering the application for construction and for sanctioning the plan, the Municipal Corporation has imposed a condition that unless and until the previous arrears in respect of the land tax are made, the application will not be processed. In those circumstances, the petitioner filed the writ petition for a declaration to declare that the levy demanded and collection of vacant land tax as a condition precedent for grant of permission/building permit is illegal, unconstitutional and ultra vires the provisions of the Tirunelveli City Munici...
A.Solaimalai Vs. the District Collector and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2011
1. The Writ Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD) No.689 of 2011 dated 17.06.2011, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant challenging the order of suspension pending enquiry passed by the second respondent Block Development Officer, dated 13.04.2010, came to be dismissed. 2. The contention raised by the appellant, as submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant is that, as per the provisions of Section 83 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act 1994, the executive authority is the President of the Village Panchayat, who has got control over the service conditions of the writ petitioner/appellant as per Section 84(b) of the Act. Since the writ petitioner/appellant happens to be the Panchayat Clerk, the impugned order passed by the second respondent Block Development Officer suspending the writ petitioner/appellant pending enquiry, is not sustainable. 3. According to the learned counsel, the appellant is losing one more right of filing an a...
Eswaran Vs. the Manager and anr.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2011
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to entertain the petitioner's application for his daughter's Educational Loan towards the course fee for Teacher Training Course in Mangayarkarasi Teacher Training Institute, Paravai, Madurai and sanction the same. 2. Mr.V.Ramalingam, learned Counsel takes notice for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. The petitioner claims to be an agricultural coolie and he has three children and states that he belonged to down-trodden community. The petitioner approaches the respondent Bank for Educational Loan for his daughter namely Janaki to pursue the course at Mangayarkarasi Teacher Training Institute, Paravai, Madurai. The request for grant of Educational Loan was not considered by the respondents orally stating that there is a loan which remains unpaid by the petitioner - the father of the girl. The other reasons stated by the learne...
R.Ramalakshmi Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2011
1. W.P(MD)Nos.6630 to 6644 of 2011 have been filed to call for the records pertaining to the impugned payment demand Working Sheets dated 05.05.2011, 15.04.2011, 06.05.2011, 07.06.2011, 30.05.2011, 10.05.2011, 29.04.2011, 23.03.2011, 03.05.2011, 16.05.2011, 19.05.2011, 10.05.2011 and 23.05.2011 respectively, on the file of the third respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the third respondent to calculate interest on different land cost between the original tentative land cost and the final land cost from the date of finalization of land cost i.e. 16.05.2011, 15.04.2011, 06.05.2011, 07.06.2011, 30.05.2011, 10.05.2011, 29.04.2011, 23.03.2011, 03.05.2011, 16.05.2011, 19.05.2011, 10.05.2011 and 23.05.2011 respectively. 2. All these writ petitions relate to allotment of house and plot by the respondent Housing Board under the V.M.Chathram Housing Scheme. This Court, by order dated 15.07.2011, made in W.P(MD)Nos.7430 of 2011 and batch, granted certain reliefs to th...
M/S.National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. V.Padmavathy and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2011
1. Challenging the award passed in MCOP No.1042 of 2003 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tanjore, the Insurance company has filed the above appeal, questioning the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 2. The respondents 1 to 4/Claimants filed M.C.O.P.No.1042 of 2003, claiming a total compensation of Rs.50 lakhs for the death of one Murugaraj, who died in a road accident. On 09.04.2003 at about 4 p.m., the said Murugaraj was travelling as a pillion rider in a Bajaj Boxer CT vehicle bearing registration No.TN49 V 8232. At that time, a Tractor bearing Registration No,TN 49 X 0279, which came in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the two wheeler and in the said accident, the said Murugaraj died on the spot. At the time of accident, he was 30 years old. The first respondent is the wife of the deceased and she was aged 22 years at the time of accident. The second respondent is the minor daughter of the deceased and the third and fo...
M/S. Vicnivaas Agency Vs. Shri N. K. Raghupathi I.A.S. and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2011
1. The petitioner seeks a Writ in the nature of Declaration, to declare that the actions of the first respondent taken against the petitioner viz., demolishing of their property and suspension of stevedoring license are unlawful, ultra vires, mala fide, arbitrary, unreasonable, unjust, perverse and vindictive, therefore are violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 of the Constitution. It is prayed that orders be in contravention to the All India Service (Conduct) Rules 1968, consequently direct the first respondent to pay Rs.3,00,00,000/- (Rupees Three Crores only) with interest to the petitioner firm for causing monetary loss, harassment, mental agony, and hardship and further to direct the second respondent to take appropriate steps with the concerned Government Departments for payment of the amount claimed to the petitioner from the first respondent's account for misuse of office, and abuse of power, and for infringing the fundamental rights of the petitioner.2. The relief of Declarati...
N.R.Sarojini Ammal Vs. the Tahsildar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2011
The petitioner has approached this Court, by invoking the extraordinary writ jurisdiction, with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondent, to carry out correction in the revenue records, in pursuance to the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.567 of 1981. 2. The petitioner had challenged the notice issued under Section 4(1) of Acquisition of Lands for Harijan Welfare Scheme Act, 1978. 3. This Court, did not go into the merit of challenge to the acquisition, but allowed W.P.No.567 of 1981 in the same terms as W.P.No.797 of 1980 (ANANTHI AMMAL AND OTHERS ..VS.. STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS). 4. The writ appeal filed by the State was also dismissed. This Court in the case of STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS ..VS.. ANANTHI AMMAL had held that the provisions of Acquisition of Lands for Harijan Welfare Scheme Act, 1978 were ultra vires the Constitution. 5. The State of Tamil Nadu challenged the decision of this Court before the Hon'ble Supreme Court...
B.Raja Chinnakarupannan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-20-2011
1. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order, dated 13.10.2005, rejecting the representation, for considering his case for promotion, on the ground, that the post of Head of Department, in polytechnic getting grand-in- aid, is to be filled by direct appointment and not promotion, as claimed by the petitioner. 2. The facts leading to the filing of this Writ Petition reads as under: The petitioner joined as Lecturer in the Mechanical Department with Arulmighu Palani Andavar Polytechnic College, Palani, Dindigul District, run by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department on 28.12.1989. 3. The next channel of promotion from the post of Lecturer is to the post of Head of Department. The case of the petitioner is that the promotional post is lying vacant for the last 22 years, as the competent authority has not considered the case for promotion. That the inaction on the part of the Governing Council has resulted in grave injustice to the petitioner, as his right to be co...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »