Chennai Court June 2016 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. Kasturi Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu,Rep. by Secretary to Governmen ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 25.01.2016, for the purpose of confering the benefit as per G.O.Ms.No.22, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 28.02.2006; G.O.Ms.No.74, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 27.06.2013; and to pass such further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper on the facts and circumstances of the case.) 1. By consent, the Writ Petition is taken up and disposed of at the admission stage itself. 2. This Writ Petition has been filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 25.01.2016. 3. The petitioner entered into service as Sweeper, on 06.08.1991. The grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of several Government Orders passed to the effect that those working prior to 1999 as Temporary Workers can...
Sadaipandian and Others Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to transfer the investigation pending in Crime No.115 of 2015 pending on the file of the second respondent police to the 3rd respondent and direct the 3rd respondent to nominate an efficient officer to investigate the case.) 1. This petition has been filed, seeking to transfer the investigation in Crime No.115 of 2015 pending on the file of the second respondent police to the 3rd respondent and direct the 3rd respondent to nominate an efficient officer to investigate the case. 2. Heard the learned counsel on either side. 3. It is represented by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that a Special Team has been formed to expeditiously investigate the case and that the investigation will be completed shortly. 4. Recording the above submission, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to complete the investigation within a period of three weeks from the date of receip...
K. Muppidathi Vs. State Rep. by The Sub-Inspector of Police, Sankarank ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the charge sheet filed by the 1st respondent in C.C.No.36 of 2016 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sankarankovil as against the petitioner) 1. Section 482 Cr. P.C., saves inherent power of the Court. Such inherent power can be exercised either to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Invoking such inherent power, this petition has been filed to quash the proceedings on the ground that the continuance would amount to abuse of the process of the Court. 2. A case in Crime No.82 of 2015 has been registered under Sections 147, 294(b), 324 and 506(i) IPC by the 1st respondent against the petitioner. After completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer has filed a charge sheet before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sankarankovil, which was taken cognizance by the Magistrate in C.C.No.36 of 2016. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the pet...
N. Raju Vs. S. Muthusamy
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C. to set aside the condition imposed in Crl.M.P.No.1211 of 2016 in C.A.No.31 of 2016 dated 04.04.2016 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Court, Tiurvallur.) 1. The criminal revision petition is directed against the order of condition imposed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur in Crl.MP.No.1211 of 2016 in CA.No.31 of 2016 dated 04.04.2016. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the complainant/respondent initiated complaint against the petitioner/accused under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. After trial the accused was found guilty of the offence and convicted, the case was tried by the Fast Track Court Magistrate Level No.II, Poonamallee and the Court found guilty under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine amount of Rs.1,000/-....
P. Sathyasheela Vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Secretar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the 3rd respondent in ROC No.8157/2014/A3, dated 09.05.2014 and quash the same and to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with all attendant service benefits and pass such further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.) 1. By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up and disposed of at the stage of admission itself. 2. This Writ Petition has been filed to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the 3rd respondent in ROC No.8157/2014/A3, dated 09.05.2014 and quash the same and to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with all attendant service benefits. 3. The petitioner entered into service as Junior Assistant, on 03.06.2009. Subsequently, he got several promotions. While, he was working ...
T. Jebaraj Vs. The Inspector General of Registration, Chennai and Othe ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to register the sale certificate issued by the 4th respondent in favour of the petitioner pertaining to the property situated in Survey Numbers 13/2A3, 13/2B, with patta Numbers 557 and 1593 at an Extent of 2.15 Cents and 1.52 Acres respectively and make necessary changes in Book 1 of the Register.) 1. The Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner has given a letter, dated 17.06.2016, to the Registry, seeking permission of this Court to withdraw this writ petition. 2. Recording the aforesaid letter, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs....
Dr. K.R. Sheeja Vs. The Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Educatio ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 2 to 4 herein to appoint the petitioner as Assistant Professor Chemistry (aided) in the vacancy caused by the retirement of one Dr.Mallikha M.Amernath on the basis of the petitioner's representation before them dated 08.09.2015.) 1. Learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this Writ Petition to which he also circulated a letter to the Registry seeking withdrawal of this Writ Petition, apart from making an endorsement, in the bundle. 2. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed....
M. Saravanan Vs. The Registrar, CAT, Chennai Bench, Chennai and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench in O.A.No.1416 of 2010 dated 27-11-2012 and quash the same.) 1. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order passed in O.A.No.1416 of 2010 dated 27-11-2012 by the Central Administrative Tribunal and quash the same. 2. The petitioner herein, as applicant has filed O.A.No.1416 of 2010 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal wherein the present contesting respondents have been shown as respondents. 3. The material averments made in the petition are that the petitioner is seeking selection to the post of Charge man (T and M), on the basis of Limited Departmental Competitive Examination held on 28th/ 29th August, 2010 by way of challenging the selection ...
K. Neelamegam Vs. The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies and Ot ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records in connection with the suspension order, dated Nil, issued by the 2nd respondent suspending the petitioner from 01.03.2016 for three months and quash the same and consequently, to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with all back wages benefits including yearly increments and to pass such orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.) 1. By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up and disposed of at the stage of admission itself. 2. This Writ Petition has been filed to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records in connection with the suspension order, dated Nil, issued by the 2nd respondent suspending the petitioner from service from 01.03.2016 for three months and to quash the same and consequently, to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with all back...
Murugesan Vs. The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai Distri ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-23-2016
(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to direct the respondents to give Police Protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and his wife by considering the petitioner's representation dated 04.06.2016.) 1. This petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to give Police Protection to the life and limb of the petitioner and his wife by considering the petitioner's representation dated 04.06.2016. 2. Heard the learned counsel on either side. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, there is an undertaking given by learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) to the effect that the petitioner's representation dated 04.06.2016 will be considered suitably and orders will be passed thereon at the earliest. 4. Recording the above undertaking, this Criminal Original Petition is closed....
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »