Chennai Court April 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.
K.M.Murugan. Vs. the Joint Director of School and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2012
Prayer :Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in his proceedings Na.ka.No.10248/A4/2006 dated 15.02.2008 quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to absorb the petitioner as office Assistant in regular time scale of pay in 3rd respondent school or in any other school under the control of the 2nd respondent by including his name in the list of Games Marker for absorption to the post of Office Assistant.O R D E R1. The petitioner was appointed as Game Marker without there being any post sanctioned by the Headmaster of Government Girls Higher Secondary School from 15.6.1994 to 31.3.1997. Thereafter he did not attend the School. However, when he came to know that the State Government had directed the sanction of the post of Marker in respect of 227 Markers working in Aided Private Schools, Local Bod...
R.Sagayaraj Vs. the Assistant Director
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2012
Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the order passed by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.29/AA/ 2011 dated 27.02.2012 and consequently, for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to abide by the resolution arrived at the peace meting dated 14.06.2011.O R D E R1. The petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the order passed by the first respondent vide Na.Ka.No.29/AA/ 2011 dated 27.02.2012 and consequently, issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to abide by the resolution passed by the peace meeting dated 14.06.2011.2. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended, that the impugned meeting cannot be held, as prior to this meeting two peace meeting was held earlier and decision taken therein with the consent of the Government was still in ...
D.Senthilveli Vs. Sri Vasavi Permanent Fund Ltd.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2012
This civil revision petition is preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as against the order dated 20.02.2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court No.I), Erode in I.A.No.110 of 2012 in I.A.No.437 of 2011 in I.A.No.983 of 2009 in O.S.No.19 of 2001.ORDER1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.2. A thumbnail sketch of the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this civil revision petition would run thus:This revision is focussed as against the dismissal of the re-open petition filed by the petitioner in the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to get condoned the delay of 488 days in filing the application to get set aside the exparte final decree passed in I.A.No.437 of 2011 on various grounds.3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner placing reliance on the grounds of revision would detail and delineate the grounds to the effect that two witnesses, viz., P.W.1 and P.W.2 were examined...
Natarajan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2012
Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to direct the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tirukoilur to furnish a copy of the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., in Crime No.473/2011 to the petitioner.ORDER1. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.473 of 2011, on the file of the respondent police. The said case has been registered for offences under Sections 354, 506(i) I.P.C., 3(1)(x) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act. The investigation is still pending and the final report has not been filed by the respondent police before the jurisdictional Magistrate. While so, the petitioner filed a petition before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tirukoilur seeking certified copy of the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., from the witnesses in the said case.2. According to the petitioner, he is in need of the same for using it in a different proceeding and therefore, he filed the sai...
K.Subbiah Vs. State by Deputy Superintendent of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2012
Prayer :-Criminal Revision is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., to set-aside the order of the I Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai in Crl.M.P.No.9450 of 2010 in C.C.No.17 of 2005, dated 16.09.2011 and discharge the petitioner/Accused-A2 from framing of the charges.ORDER1. The Government of Tamilnadu have ordered for recruitment of 1000 Sub-Inspectors of Police (Men and Women) by direct recruitment vide their order in G.O.M.S.No.1317, Home (Police III) Department, dated 08.09.1997. A total number of 27,304 applications for men candidates and 4,339 applications for women candidates, for Sub-Inspectors, were received. On scrutiny of applications, 26,012 applications for men candidates and 4,167 applications for women candidates, were found to be valid. 1,292 applications for men candidates and 172 applications for women candidates were found to be invalid. The eligible applicants were called for physical efficiency test. 8,628 men candidates and 830 women candidates cleared the ...
N.Thangavelu and ors.Vs. the State of Tamilnadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2012
COMMON PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the second respondent in connection with the order passed by her in her proceedings in Letter No.39631/M1/2011, dated 15.4.2011 and quash the same and direct the respondents to pay the monthly benefits as per the order passed by the first respondent in G.O.Ms.Nos.216 Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated 22.3.1993, 270 Finance (Pay Cell) Department dated 26-8-2010 and also as per the order of the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.P.No.17187 of 2003 dated 28.11.2007 confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP Civil CC No.2746 of 2010 dated 23.4.2010 forthwith with effect from the date of eligibility for the selection grade and the consequential special grade with all monetary and service benefits.COMMON ORDER1. The common prayer in all the Writ Petitions is to quash the respective impugned orders dated 15.4.2011 passed by th...
V.Chandrasekar Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2012
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Tahsildar from 1985 the date on which the petitioner's immediate junior Mahalingam was promoted to the post of Tahsildar and to the post of Deputy Collector from the date on which he was promoted to the said post together with the difference in monetary benefit and consequently work out and pay the terminal benefits including pension and DCRG, full pension together with 18% interest per annum from 31.03.1991 the date the petitioner was retired on his attaining the age of superannuation.O R D E R1. The petitioner joined the Revenue Department as Junior Assistant in the year 1954. The petitioner was promoted as Assistant and thereafter as Deputy Tahsildar. The petitioner was sent on deputation to the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation to man the post of Single Lock Officer in Attur.2. The petitio...
D.Sundararajan Vs. G.Hemalatha
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2012
This civil revision petition is filed against the order dated 14.2.2011 passed in C.M.P.No.1385 of 2010 in A.S.S.R.No.43028 of 2010 by the Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.ORDER1. Inveighing the order dated dated 14.2.2011 passed in C.M.P.No.1385 of 2010 in A.S.S.R.No.43028 of 2010 by the Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, this civil revision petition is focussed.2. Heard both sides.3. The epitome and the long and short of the relevant facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this civil revision petition would run thus:(i) The revision petitioner herein, as plaintiff, filed the suit for injunction, which was dismissed, after contest. Subsequently, the appeal memorandum was presented by the plaintiff along with the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to get the delay of 649 days condoned in filing the appeal on various grounds, including the one that there was communication gap between the petitioner and his advocate.(ii) The respondent...
Rane (Madras) Limited Vs. Corporation of Chennai
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2012
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to impugned order No.Ma.Aa.9 Va.Thu.Na.Ka.No Special/10, dated 3.3.2010 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently forbear the respondents from collecting a sum of Rs.10,55,400/- under the guise of arrears of trade license fee.ORDER1. This writ petition is filed to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to impugned order No.Ma.Aa.9 Va.Thu.Na.Ka.No Special/10, dated 3.3.2010 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently forbear the respondents from collecting a sum of Rs.10,55,400/- under the guise of arrears of trade license fee.2. The petitioner challenges the impugned proceedings whereby a sum of Rs.10,55,400/- is demanded in excess for the purpose of renewing the licence. The petitioner is a...
Fyz. Mohammad Vs. the Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Ad ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Apr-12-2012
Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in D.Dis.K4/14215/ 2004 (RP No.53 of 2005) dated 20.04.2007 passed by the first respondent, confirming the orders passed by the third respondent dated 12.03.2003 in RC No.B2/33100/2001 and the order passed by the 4th respondent in No.A1/544/2000 dated 27.06.2001 and quash the same and further direct the 6th and 7th respondents to work out their remedy before the Civil Court.ORDER1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition praying to quash the order dated 27.06.2001 passed by the fourth respondent herein cancelling the patta granted in favour of the petitioner and to issue patta in favour of the sixth and seventh respondents herein, which was also confirmed by the third respondent in the appeal filed by the petitioner and further confirmed by the first respondent in the revision petition.2. According to the petitioner, his father Late. Amir Mohammed Mira...
- ‹ Prev
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- Next ›
- Last »