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.
T. Lalitha Rani Vs. State of Tamilnadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the Respondents especially the 2nd respondent in his proceedings made in Advertisement No.3/2001 dated 14.9.2001 and quash the same as null and void illegal and invalid and violative of statutory rules and procedures ultra vires the provisions of constitution especially Article 14, 16, 21 and 309 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner as Tamil Pandit based on her employment seniority as contemplated in G.O.Ms. No.477 Education Science and Technology dept. dt.16.7.96 with all attendant benefits.O R D E R1. The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the Advertisement No.3/2001 dated 14.9.2001, being null and void, invalid and violative of statutory rules and procedures.2. The advertisement is challenged to be ultra vires the const...
C.Panneerselvam Vs. the State Transport Appellate
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
PRAYER in W.P.No.2923 of 2012: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to implement the order of the first Respondent Tribunal in App.No.109/2011 dated 14.11.2011 in granting renewal of contract carriage Autorickshaw permit to the petitioner's vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-46-E.1018. PRAYER in W.P.No.2924 of 2012: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to implement the order of the first Respondent Tribunal in App.No.112/2011 dated 14.11.2011 in granting renewal of contract carriage Autorickshaw permit to the petitioner's vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-46-E-1550.C O M M O N O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.2.At this stage of the hearing of these Writ Petitions, the learned counsel appearing on behalf...
V.Kalpana Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorified Mandamus calling for the records from the 3rd respondent to the proceedings dated 12.12.2011 bearing Reference No.Nil and quash the same in the Village Level Committee / VEC of the 3rd respondent School as illegal, arbitrary without jurisdiction, unconstitutional, contrary to G.O.(Ms) No.108, School Education (C2) Department dated 31.07.2003 and consequently direct the Respondents 1 to 3 to declare the writ petitioner as the Chairperson of the 3rd Respondent's School, allow her to function so without any hindrance.O R D E R1. The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the order dated 12.12.2011 declaring the Respondent No.4 as the Chairperson of the Village Level Committee/VEC of the Panchayat Union Middle School, Ayanvelur, Velur Post, Via Kalamarudur, Ulundurpet Taluk.2. The petitioner is the Ward Member of Velur Panchayat Union Ward No.2...
Tamil Nadu Defence Officers Vs. R.Sakkubai at Chokkammal
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
ORDER1. Defendant in O.S.No.254 of 1999 on the file of the District Munsif, Alandur is the revision petitioner.2. The respondent filed the above suit for declaration and for mandatory injunction. The revision petitioner, though entered appearance in the said suit and filed written statement, did not contest the suit and therefore, the revision petitioner was set ex parte and ex parte decree was passed on 27.6.2006. Thereafter, the respondent/decree holder filed E.P.No.28 of 2008 to execute the decree and notice was served on the revision petitioner on 21.4.2008 and thereafter he took steps to file the application to set aside the ex parte decree and there was a delay of 845 days in filing such application and to condone the delay in filing the application to set aside the ex parte decree, the application in I.A.No.1379 of 2009 was filed and that application was dismissed and as against the same, this revision is filed.3. Mr.Ashok Menon, learned counsel for the revision petitioner submi...
P.V.Regunathan Vs. the Commissioner
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
PrayerWrit petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to grant 1200 units of liquor for the petitioner, pursuant to petitioner's representation dated 29.09.2009.ORDER1. By consent of both sides, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. Heard Mr.A.Sivaji, counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Muruganantham, Additional Government Pleader, for the respondents.2. In this petition, a direction has been sought for by the petitioner to direct the respondents to grant 1200 units of liquor for the petitioner by considering his representation, dated 29.09.2009. It is his claim that he is the proprietor of Hotel Sri Rajendra New Lodge, at Door No.1.3.75-A, J.R.R.Nagar, Vaigai Dam Road, Thenkarai, with FL3 license and he is running the same from 12.10.2004. For running a bar in the said premises, initially the first respondent allowed 350 units of liquor. On account of heavy demand, a further request was made b...
Ponnusamy Vs. the District Collector, Vellore
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the first respondent in proceeding Na.Ka.PaE1/9426/2008, dated 4.11.2008, and quash the same as illegal, incompetent and without jurisdiction and further direct the respondents to regularize the service of the petitioners.O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsels appearing for the respondents.2. It has been stated that the petitioners had been serving under the respondents, for several years, in different capacities, at various places. While so, instead of regularizing their services, they had been asked to seek employment from a private person on the ground that the tender had been floated to hand over the maintenance of the project in question, at Yelagiri hills.3. It has been further stated that the petitioners, who are employed as government servants, had been te...
M.Dilshad Begam Vs. the District Elementary
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the orders of the 1st respondent dated 16.05.2001 issued in Ref.No.Na.Ka.No.2736/94/2001 and quash the same and direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue as Primary school Head Mistress.O R D E R1. The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, to quash the order dated 16.05.2001, reverting the petitioner to the post of Secondary Grade Assistant from the post of Primary School Head Mistress.2. The translated copy of the impugned order reads as under:Proceedings Na.Ka.No.2736/A4/2001 dated 16.05.2001 of the District Elementary Educational Officer, Tiruchirappali. Sub: Trichi Urban Range Municipal Gosha Urudu Primary School Tmt.M.Dilshad Begum Head Mistress Request for reversion Reg. Ref: 1.Procs.Na.Ka.No.208/A1/2001 dated 18.04.2001 of the Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Trichi (Urb...
J.ilango Vs. the Labour Court
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
Prayer in W.P.Nos.33884 and 33885 of 2007: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records from the file of the first respondent with respect to the impugned order passed in I.D.No.85 of 2002, I.D.No.84 of 2002 dated 29.05.2007 and quash the same and further directing the second respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with full back wages and other benefits. Prayer in W.P.No.36542 of 2007: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the second respondent made in I.D.No.83 of 2002 dated 29.05.2007 and quash the same and directing the first respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with back wages and all other attendant benefits.COMMON ORDER1. These three Writ Petitions were filed by the three different workmen working in the respondent management. In all the three Writ Petitions, the challenge is to the indi...
A.Kuttalingam Vs. the District Registrar
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
PrayerWrit Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to inquire into the affairs of the second respondent society by taking action in accordance with law on the petitioner's complaint dated 14.01.2011.ORDER1. This Writ Petition, at the instance of a member of District Club, Nagercoil, seeks a Writ of Mandamus, directing the District Registrar (Societies), Kanyakumari District, to take action on the basis of his complaint dated 14 January, 2011 and pass appropriate orders.FACTUAL MATRIX:2. The District Club at Nagercoil was established in the year 1958. The Club had on its roll about 750 members and they are residing in and around Kanyakumari District. It is essentially a recreation club. The Society is administered by an Executive Committee comprising the President, Vice President, Secretary, Joint Secretary, Treasurer and Managing Committee Members. The election used to be held every yea...
Akshay J.Mehta Vs. Madras Metro Water Supply and Sewerage Board and or ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
Writ Appeal No.938 of 2003 has been preferred under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent as against the order of the learned single Judge dated 11.2.2002, made in W.P.No.13903 of 1994. Writ Petition No.8172 of 2003 has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring Regulations 3,13 and 15 of the Madras Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Boar's Water Supply Charges (Levy and Collections) Regulations, 1982 and the consequential G.O.Ms.No.618, dated 22.6.1988 issued by the 1st respondent insofar as they direct levy of charges on the petitioners who have not applied for metro water connection and who are not consuming any metro water as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to insist the petitioners to pay water charges without consuming water.COMMON JUDGMENTELIPE DHARMA RAO, J.1. The question involved in these matters is: 'whether the Chennai Me...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »