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.
T. Saravanakumar Vs. The Joint Registrar of Co-OP Societies, Dindigul ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-16-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the second respondent in his proceedings dated 30.09.2010 and to quash the same as illegal and thereby to direct the respondents to reinstate the Petitioner in the service.) 1. The Learned counsel on record for the Petitioner submitted a letter, dated 14.06.2016, to the Registry seeking permission of this Court, to withdraw this Writ Petition. The said letter is placed on record. 2. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are dismissed. No costs....
C. Balasubramanian Vs. The District Collector, Madurai and Others
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-16-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 4.5.2016 with regard to the issuance of Legal Heirship Certificate of his father (late) A.Chokkalingam to his family members within the time frame stipulated by this Court.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent of both sides, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. According to the Petitioner, his father A.Chokkalingam died on 3.1.2008 at the age of 75 years. So far Legal Heirship Certificate has not been issued to his legal heirs (including the Petitioner).The Petitioner as early as on 4.5.2016 has submitted his representation addressed to the Respondents 1 to 3 seeking for issuance of Legal Heirship Certificate. It appears that the said representation is pending till date. 4. In view of the fact that the Petitioner's representation, dated 4.5.2016 seeking for issua...
P. Balasubramaniyan Vs. The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Karur
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-16-2016
1. This writ petition is instituted by one P. Balasubramaniyan, resident of Kagithapuram Post, Karur District. He sought for a writ of Mandamus directing the Tahsildar, Manmangalam Taluk, Karur District, to furnish Community Certificate for his two sons, namely, Sri. B. Kanagasabapathy and Sri. B. Rathnasabapathy. 2. At pages 80 and 82 of the paper book, two applications filed by Sri. B. Kanagasabapathy and Sri. B. Rathnasabapathy, seeking grant of Community Certificate, are enclosed. It is, thus, clear that the Certificates were sought for by Sri. B. Kanagasabapathy and Sri. B. Rathnasabapathy, respectively. But however, they are not the petitioners in this writ petition. Incidentally, they might be the children of the present petitioner herein. The petitioner, therefore, cannot appear and sue in his name on their behalf. The petitioner should be the one, who has applied for Community Certificate, in his name. If we permit the petitioner - Sri. P. Balasubramaniyan, to appear as party-...
Ravi Balakrishnan Vs. Thamizharasi
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-16-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition is filed, under Section 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to the impugned order, dated 23.03.2015, made in M.C.No.3 of 2014, on the file of Judicial Magistrate, Musiri, set aside the same.) 1. An husband wishes to minimise the quantum of maintenance, which he was ordered to pay to his wife. 2. The revision petitioner is the husband and the respondent is his wife. 3. On 23.03.2015, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Musiri, in M.C.No.3 of 2014, ordered the revision petitioner to pay monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.4,000/- to the respondent, with effect from the date of filing of the maintenance case. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the revision petitioner is aged. He is going to be superannuated. Further, he is also bound to pay her maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,500/- per month, which has been ordered under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, in H.M.O.P.No.67 of 2008, by the learned Sub Judge, Me...
S. Fathima Beevi Vs. The Chairman cum Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Ci ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-16-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to provide compassionate allowance to the petitioner as per Rule 40 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 within a time stipulated by this Court.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. According to the petitioner, her father late M.Shajahan was selected through the District Employment Office, Ramanathapuram on 04.12.1981 and joined as Temporary Watchman in the office of second respondent/Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation, Ramanathapuram Region, Ramanathapuram District. Later, he was appointed as Bill Clerk in second respondent's office and was working from 27.08.1990 to 01.09.1992 without any blemish. 4. The stand of the petitioner is that on 01.09.1992, her father Shajahan was removed from his service, from the post of Bill Clerk for his negligence in duty and the allegation was ...
Sheik Abdulla Vs. The Chief Director, represented for Tamil Nadu Minor ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-16-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to disburse Rs.20,00,000/- as educational loan for studying the Petitioner's son Mohaideen Abdul Jailani MBBS Course at Qingdao University situated at 308, Ningaxia Road, Qindao, Shandong, China for the period of 2015-2021.) 1. The learned counsel for the petitioner has made an endorsement in the typed-set of papers of the Writ Petition to the effect that the writ petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the Writ Petition. 2. Recording the aforesaid fact and the endorsement so made, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs....
B. Saraswathi Amma Vs. The Chief Educational Officer, Kanyakumari Dist ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-16-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.06.2016 seeking to approve the petitioner as Correspondent in the light of the revocation deed dated 20.05.2016 within the period that may be stipulated by this Honourable Court.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. According to the petitioner, the Aided Higher Secondary School, Arumanai is an individual Management School run by her late husband Mr.T.Sekhara Pillai. Soon after his death, she has been functioning as Correspondent cum Manager of the school since 2002. While that being the factual situation, with a view to start some other educational institutions, she executed and registered a Trust Deed on 19.12.2006 in the name and style of 'T.Sekhara Pillai Memorial Educational and Cultural Development Trust'. However, the Trust Deed ha...
Magna College of Engineering, Rep. by its Chairman, Chennai Vs. Anna U ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-16-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the respondents relating to the order of the first respondent in their Lr.No.211/CA1-Deficit. Colleges/AU/2016 dated 14.05.2016 and Lr.No.02/AFFLN/CAI/AU/2016-17/1112 dated 14.05.2016 and quash the same insofar as reduction of intake of 50% in existing Under Graduate courses and no admission in Post Graduate courses and consequently direct the firs respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 11.05.2016 and 25.05.2016 to restore the intake in consonance with the approval granted by AICTE, vide order in F.No.Southern/1-2811581808/2016/EOA dated 10.04.2016.) 1. By consent this writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner, in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition, would aver among other things that it is an Engineering College being run by JDN Educational Trust and the College...
G. Parameshwari Vs. The Registrar General, High Court Madras and Other ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jun-16-2016
(Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the entire proceedings in R.O.C. No. 1098/2013/C1 dated 20.6.2014 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same.) Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. From the contentions of both sides, it transpires that the petitioner lady was originally appointed as Office Assistant on 18.6.2008 in the Judicial Magistrate Court, Nagapattinam and after having met with several transfers, submitted her resignation, but, sought for cancellation of the same within a period of two months and since the same was not acceded by the respondents, she is before this court. 3. Before proceeding to examine the case of the petitioner, let us see what is the law relating to resignation by a Government servant. Rule 41-A of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules reads a...
A. Sumaiya Vs. The Chief Secretary, Secetary to Government, Chennai an ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jun-16-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to give opportunity to the Petitioner in any post or in the reserved post in the category of Disability to the Post of Assistant Public Relationship Officer at Theni District.) 1. The learned counsel for the petitioner has made an endorsement in the typed-set of papers of the Writ Petition to the effect that the writ petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the Writ Petition. 2. Recording the aforesaid fact and the endorsement so made, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. No costs....
- ‹ Prev
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- Next ›
- Last »