Chennai Court February 2012 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.
S.N.Mohammed Hanifa Vs. the Under Secretary to Government
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the respondent vide in his proceedings F No.29/19/ 2005-FF(INA) dated 21.09.2005 and quash the same, consequently direct the respondent to issue Freedom Fighter Pension to the petitioner.O R D E R1. The petitioner prays that issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari, to quash the order dated 21.09.2005, declining the request of the petitioner for grant of Freedom Fighter Pension.2. The impugned order reads as under:F.No.29/19/2005-FF(INA)Government of India/Bharat SarkarMinistry of Home Affairs/Girih MantralayaLok Nayak Bhavan, Khan MarketNew Delhi-110 003Dated September, 2005ToShri S.N.Mohamed AnifaS/o Nagoor MeeraNo.1, 6th Street, Bharathi NagarKorukkupettai, Chennai-21Subject: Swatantrata Sainik Samman (SSS) Pension Scheme, 1980-reg.Sir,I am directed to refer to Government of Tamil Nadu's Letter No.50217/PP.1/...
V.Balasubramanian Vs.The District Collector
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to refund the Proportionate to Lease amount for 2 years and 9 1/2 months along with the Security Deposit and unadjusted seiginorage fee paid by the petitioner on 18.03.2003 in respect of the Sand Quarry situated in Survey No.1, Unniyur Village, Thottiyam Taluk, Tiruchirapalli District as per the order of the Honourable Supreme Court in C.A.No.5572 to 5644 of 2005 dated 24.3.2006.O R D E R1. Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, the learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents.2. Though the prayer is for a larger relief, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if the first respondent is directed to dispose of the representation, dated 2.3.2008, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period.3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the...
Syed Murtaza Basha Vs. S.E.Syed Gulam Mohideen
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
PRAYER: Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondents 2 and 3 herein to provide adequate police protection for the discharge of the petitioners duties as the Muthavalli of the Hazarath Syed Sha Rahamathullah Sahib Wakf Thaikal Anaikaran Chathiram and also for protecting the Cattle Chandy and other Wakf properties from unlawful acts of the removed Muthavalli Syed Ghulam mohideen in accordance with law.O R D E R1. The Petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondents 2 and 3 herein to provide adequate police protection for the discharge of the Petitioners duties, as the Muthavalli of the Hazarath Syed Sha Rahamathullah Sahib Wakf Thaikal Anaikaran Chathiram, as also for protecting the Cattle Chandy and other Wakf properties from unlawful acts of the removed Muthavalli Syed Ghulam mohideen.2. The respondent No.2 a...
V.Gomathy Vs. the Vice Chancellor
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
This writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records in Proc.No.E1(1)/1043/2010, dated 25.10.2010 passed by the second respondent promoting the 3rd to 8th respondents herein as Assistant Registrars who are lacking the prescribed qualification as laid down in Appendix I of the Service Status of the Establishment of Dr.M.G.R. Medical University and quash the same in respect of 3rc to 8th respondents and further to direct the first and second respondents to promote the petitioner herein as Assistant Registrar in the first respondent University from 25.10.2010 onwards.ORDER1. The petitioner, who was working as a Superintendent in the respondent University, has filed the present writ petition challenging an order dated 25.10.2010 wherein and by which certain employees were transferred and posted. By the impugned order, the petitioner who was holding the post of Section Officer, was posted to Stor...
The Union of India Owning Southern Railway. Vs. G.Jayalakshmi.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
JUDGEMENT1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the Union of India owning Southern Railway by its General Manager, Chennai against the order dated 27.11.2008 made in OA.no.83/2007 by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Chennai Bench, thereby granting a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation with interest at 9 per cent p.a. from the date of the order till payment to the Respondents herein/claimants, who are the wife and minor children of the deceased Gnanamani, who succumbed to the injuries sustained in an 'untoward incident', which took place on 3.6.2006 between Wimco Nagar and Kathivakkam Railway Stations at KM11/14.2. The claimants before the Tribunal contended that the deceased was a passenger in the EMU Train and he was travelling from Korukkupet on 3.6.2006 and due to overcrowding in the Train, he had accidentally fallen down from the train between Wimco Nagar and Kathivakkam Railway Stations at KM11/14 down line and sustained injuries all over the body and thereafter, he succumbed...
Shri Nandanam Educational Social Welfare Trust. Vs. the State of Tamil ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of certiorari calling for the records of the 3rd respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.Q11472/2010 dated 05.07.2010 and quash the same.O R D E R1. The petitioner has approached this court, with a prayer for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari, to quash the order dated 05.07.2010, of the 3rd respondent/District Revenue Officer, in ordering the Tahsildar 4th respondent to change the patta entries standing in the name of the petitioner.2. The petitioner is the owner of land measuring 3.32 acres comprised in S.No.16/2 Hectares 1.34.5, kist 1.86, in pursuance to purchase vide registered sale deed dated 14.08.2000. Since the date of purchase, petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the property.3. On the application moved by the petitioner, the Tahsildar granted patta No.i 51 in favour of the petitioner for the Fasili 1418.4. The Case of the petitioner is that some persons tried to inter...
V.Prakash Naidu Vs. the Secretary to Govt
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to To call for the records made in the impugned order Na.Ka.No. 43411/Pa.Aa.6/99 dated 07/11/2002 passed by the second respondent set aside the same and direct the respondents to regularise the petitioner service benefits from 24/07/1980 to 15/05/1990.O R D E R1. The petitioner was appointed as a last grade servant in the Sericulture department on 01.06.1973. In the year 1997 and was promoted as Operator and thereafter to the post of Junior Inspector.2. The petitioner was placed under suspension on the charges of serious misconduct on 24.07.1980, and was issued charge memo. The petitioner was found guilty of charges levelled against the petitioner and a major punishment of stoppage of two years increment with cumulative effect was imposed on the petitioner.3. The department, in addition to the departmental enquiry, also registered a criminal case against the ...
Balamurugan Vs. the State by Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
PrayerAppeal filed under Section 374 of Criminal Procedure Code to call for the records in S.C.No.353 of 2009 from Magalir Needhi Mandram, Madurai and set aside the judgment dated 19.9.2011.JUDGMENT(Judgment of the Court was delivered by P.DEVADASS ,J)1. This is a bride-burning case, where Poomari, an innocent girl became a prey to fire.2. In this connection, her husband Balamurugan (A.1) and her mother-in- law Maruthayee (A.2) were prosecuted for offences under Sections 498-A and 302 IPC before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Magalir Needhi Mandram, Madurai, in S.C.No.353 of 2009, where, on 19.9.2011, both were convicted under Sections 498-A and 302 IPC and each were sentenced to 1 year rigorous imprisonment and fined Rs.1,000/-, in default 2 months rigorous imprisonment under Section 498-A; and each were sentenced to life and fined Rs.3,000/-, in default, six months rigorous imprisonment under Section 302 IPC., and their substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently....
A.Guruvaiah Vs. the Superintending Engineer
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the second respondent in L.R.No.EE/D/VDR/AEIER/F.Doc/D.24/2002 dated 20.4.2002 and quash the same.O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the second respondent in L.R.No.EE/D/VDR/AEIER/F.Doc/D.24/2002 dated 20.4.2002 and quash the same.2. At the time of admission, this Court granted interim stay on 21.5.2002 and the same was made absolute on 25.8.2003.3. M/s.G.Vasudeven and P.Gunaraj, learned counsel appearing for the respondents states that the impugned order passed by the second respondent Executive Engineer provides for an appeal to the first respondent Superintending Engineer, Virudhunagar Electricity Distribution Circle, Virudhunagar. They brought to the attention of the court para 3 of the counter-affidavit and it reads as fol...
Ms.Bhuvaneswari Tex Vs. the Assistant Commissioner
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the respondent herein in TIN No.33242420255/2009-10 on his files quash the order dated 29.7.2011 passed therein.O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsels appearing for both sides.2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the impugned order, dated 29.7.2011, had been passed by the respondent, since, the dealer could not file the objections to the revised notice, dated 20.7.2011, within the stipulated time. The objections could not be filed by the petitioner, as the Accountant of the petitioner was unwell, at the relevant point of time. Therefore, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had prayed that another opportunity may be given to the petitioner to file its objections to the revised notice, dated 20.7.2011, issued by the respondent, along with the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »