Chennai Court June 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. Unnikrishna Vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
Writ Appeal filed against the order dated 10.11.2010 passed by the Learned single Judge of this Court in W.P. No.16076 of 2008.JUDGMENT(Judgment was delivered by M. VENUGOPAL, J.)1. The Appellant/petitioner has preferred the instant writ appeal against the order dated 10.11.2010 passed by the Learned single Judge in W.P. No.16076 of 2008.2. According to the Learned counsel for the Appellant/petitioner, Learned single Judge has incorrectly dismissed the writ petition filed by the Appellant/writ petitioner inter-alia holding that the Appellant/petitioner is not entitled to get the relief of quashing the impugned order of the first respondent, in and by which, the Government has rejected his representation dated 14.12.2007 claiming the Encashment of Leave on Retirement and also for a consequential direction for settling the claim for remaining Earned Leave for 83 days with interest @ 18% per annum from the date it has fallen due.3. Advancing his arguments, the Learned counsel for the Appe...
V.Rathinam. Vs. the Chief Engineer and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to effect Electricity Deposit Refund on the representation dated 28.5.2009 of the patentor's Package Company and the Wedding Hall situate at No.22, Aanjeeamman Koil Street, Anakaputhur, Chennai and Padmapriya Kalyana Mandapam, Vinoonha Nagar, Anakaputhur, Chennai for related relief.O R D E R1. This Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to effect Electricity Deposit Refund on the representation dated 28.5.2009 of the patentor's Package Company and the Wedding Hall situate at No.22, Aanjeeamman Koil Street, Anakaputhur, Chennai and Padmapriya Kalyana Mandapam, Vinoonha Nagar, Anakaputhur, Chennai for related relief. 2. Mr.P.Gunaraj, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent the writ petition is taken ...
V.Muthuramalinga Pandian Vs. the Trustee or Assistant Commissioner
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
PrayerWrit Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for the relief of issuance of writ of mandamus to forbear the respondents 1 and 2 from making any public auction or calling for tenders with respect to the fishery rights of Periakulam tank and Thondaman kulam tank in Ilanji village in Tenkasi taluk in Tirunelveli District for the fasli years from 1422 to 1424.ORDERR.BANUMATHI,J.1. Petitioner seeks writ of mandamus forbearing respondents 1 and 2 from conducting any public auction or calling for tenders with respect to the fishery rights of Periakulam tank and Thondaman kulam tank in Ilanji village in Tenkasi taluk in Tirunelveli District for the fasli years from 1422 to 1424.2. As a policy matter of Tamil Nadu Government, Self Help Organizations - Water Resources Organizations were formed and those organizations are governed by their own rules under the control of District Collector. Petitioner is the President of one such similar organization with name 55...
R.Premkumar Vs. the Deputy Inspector General of Police.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
PRAYERWrit petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the order of the 1st respondent in C.No.C4/AP90/2009 dated 17.06.2009 and the order passed by 2nd respondent in PR.No.93/08 dated 16.04.2009 and quash the same and direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with all attendant benefits. (Prayed amended vide Hon'ble Court order dated 18.06.2012 in M.P.1/2011)ORDER1. The petitioner joined service as Grade II Police Constable on 15.04.1997 in Tuticorin District. While he was working in Maniyachi Police Station, he was implicated as A9 in a criminal case in crime No.127 of 2008 under Sections 147, 148 and 302 I.P.C. on the file of Srivaikuntam police station. He was placed under suspension, by an order dated 19.07.2008. Subsequently, a charge memo dated 18.08.2008, under rule 3(b) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 19...
C.Tharmaraj Vs. the Commissioner of Prohibition
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
COMMON JUDGMENTB. RAJENDRAN, J1. In view of the issues involved in these appeals are one and the same, both the appeals are taken up together and a common judgment is delivered by consent of both parties.2. The case of the appellant is that he had obtained valid licence in Form 25-D issued under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, to manufacture and sell the ayurvedic medicines viz., Kanakasavam, Jeeraka Aristam and Ashoka Aristam. Originally the licence was issued for the period commencing from 31.10.2000 to 31.12.2001 which is subject to periodical renewal. The licence was renewed upto 31.12.2005. He has also made an application for renewal for a further period beyond 31.12.2005 at that time the same was pending. The renewal application was filed on 15.12.2005 i.e. before the date of expiry. Though the application was pending, no final order was passed. According to the appellant, if no order is passed, he is deemed to have the licence and continued to have the licence as per Rule 157...
Tamilavel Uma Maheswaranar Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
COMMON JUDGMENTR. KARUPPIAH, J.1. The above Writ Appeals are directed against the common order of learned single Judge passed in W.P.(MD) Nos.12887 and 12888 of 2011. W.P.(MD) No.12887 of 2011 has been filed for issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records on the file of the respondents 3 and 2 in connection with the orders passed by them in their proceedings Na.Ka.No.5563/A3/2011 dated 4.10.2011 and Na.Ka.No.30702/F3/2011 dated 31.10.2011 respectively and quash the same and direct the respondents 2 ans 3 to grant approval to the order passed by the College Committee in R.C.No.3/2011 dated 01.10.2011 under Section 14-1(C) read with 19(2) of the Tamil Nadu Private College (Regulations) Act 1976 (for short the Act) and the Rules and Regulations framed thereunder. W.P.No.(MD).No.12888 of 2011 has been filed for issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records on the file of the respondents 3 and 2 in connection with the orders passed by them in th...
The Executive Engineer Rws Division Vs. S.Nagendramani
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
PRAYER IN W.A.(MD).No. 375 of 2008Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of Letters. Patent against the Order, dated 23.07.2007 passed in W.P.(MD).No. 3720 of 2004 on the file of this Honourable High Court, by His Lordship Mr.JUSTICE K.Chandru.PRAYER IN W.A.(MD).No. 376 of 2008Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of Letters. Patent against the Order, dated 23.07.2007 passed in W.P.(MD).No. 3719 of 2004 on the file of this Honourable High Court, by His Lordship Mr.JUSTICE K.Chandru.COMMON JUDGMENTB.RAJENDRAN, J.1. The Government has preferred these Appeals as against the order passed by the learned Single Judge, made in W.P.(MD).Nos.3719 and 3720 of 2004 respectively, dated 23.07.2007.2. In view of the issues involved in these appeals are one and the same, both the appeals are taken up together and a common judgment is delivered by consent of both parties.3. The respondent in W.A.(MD).No. 376 of 2008 and the petitioner in W.P.(MD).No. 3719 of 2004 was appointed as Nominal Muster Roll (NMR) employee with ef...
E. Balasundaram Vs. the District Collector
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to shift the activity of 4th respondent flour mill situated at Door No.412, Chetty Street, Perunagar Village, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram District from the residential area to alternative location based on the petitioner representation dated 23.11.2011.O R D E R1. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned.2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that in spite of an order, dated 12.8.2011, having been passed by the second respondent, with regard to shifting of the flour mill, in question, the fourth respondent had not shifted the said flour mill, till date.2. The learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent had submitted that this Court may be pleased to grant three months time to shift the flour mill from the present place location...
V.L.Kaliannan Vs. Jagadambal and ors.
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
This civil revision petition is preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as against the fair and final order dated 02.04.2012 passed by the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode in I.A.No.277 of 2012 in A.S.No.30 of 2011.ORDER1. Heard both sides.2. Animadverting upon the fair and final order dated 02.04.2012 passed by the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Erode in I.A.No.277 of 2012 in A.S.No.30 of 2011, this civil revision petition has been focussed.3. A summation and summarisation of the germane facts, in a few broad strokes, can be encapsulated thus:(i) The revision petitioner herein filed the suit seeking the following reliefs:- To pass a decree in favour of the plaintiff and as against the defendants,- declaring that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit properties by virtue of registered sale deed dated 13.12.1995;- restraining the defendants, their men, agents, etc., from in and in any manner either trespassing into the suit properties or ...
P.S.Annamalai Udayar Vs. the District Collector
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-25-2012
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to receive back the compensation amount awarded to the petitioner in the Land Acquisition proceedings in respect of the dry lands in S.Nos.72/1 - 0.46.0 hares, 73/2B- 0.07.0 hares and 72/2A-0.38.5 hares in Pillur Village, Villupuram Taluk and thereby direct the respondents to issue necessary proceedings making the above the lands free from acquisition proceedings and restore the property to the petitioner.O R D E R1. This writ petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to restore the lands in question, belonging to the petitioner, which had been subjected to land acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents.2. The petitioner had stated that the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents, in respect of the land in question, had been quashed, by a...
- ‹ Prev
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- Next ›
- Last »