Chennai Court July 2016 Judgments
Establishment Committee of the Board of Governors National Institute o ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-28-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the order dated 29.3.2011 made in O.A.No.1222 of 2009 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, Chennai 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 or any appropriate writ, calling for the records relating to the order dated 29.3.2011 passed in Original Application No.1222 of 2009 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench and quash the same. 2. The respondent herein, as applicant, has filed Original Application No.1222 of 2009 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, wherein the present petitioners have been arrayed as respondents. 3. It is averred in the application that the applicant has joined service as Assistant Professor on 3.6.1996 at Chennai and during his tenure of offi...
Tag this Judgment!G. Mary Jennie Vs. The District Collector, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari Dist ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-28-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents herein to make necessary changes in the revenue records and assign the lands in Survey No.607/3, 606/1 in Kollamcode Village, Vilavancode Taluk, Kanyakumari District, within the time frame stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. According to the petitioner, she is owning lands in Survey Nos. 606/1, 606/2, 606/3, 607/3 at Kollamcode Village, Vilavancode Taluk, Kanyakumari District and the total extent of the land is 74 cents and the same was purchased by her by two sale deeds in the years 1964 and 1968 respectively. Survey Nos.606/1 and 607/3 were classified as assessed waste dry lands. Subsequently, she is residing in the survey lands by constructing a house and by planting several trees such as coconut, jack fruit and by digging a well for the purpose of irr...
Tag this Judgment!R. Nadiya Vs. The Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Chennai and ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-28-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the order passed by the 3rd respondent in Na.Ka.No.B2/1166/2007, dated 23.02.2010 and consequently the order passed in Na.Ka.No.B2/3146/2010, dated 26.03.2010 and quash the same and directing the 2nd respondent to appoint the petitioner for the post of Village Assistant in Kallarathinipatti Village.) 1. The above writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the order passed by the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.B2/1166/2007, dated 23.02.2010 and the consequential order passed in Na.Ka.No.B2/3146/2010, dated 26.03.2010 and quash the same and to direct the second respondent to appoint the petitioner in the post of Village Assistant in Kallarathinipatti Village. 2. The petitioner's case is that on 06.01.2010, a paper publication was made calling for applications from eligible candida...
Tag this Judgment!All Angels Educational Society, Rep. by its President Jeyaleela Sundar ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-28-2016
(PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the respondent and quash the impugned order in C.N.No.CCIT III/10(23C)(vi)/13-14, dated 13.11.2013 and direct the respondent to grant registration under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act.) 1. Heard Mr.R.Venkata Narayanan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.J.Narayanasamy, learned counsel for the respondent and with their consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for disposal. 2. The petitioner is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, which has established and administering an Educational Institution under the name and style of All Angels Matriculation Higher Secondary School . The petitioner is registered under Section 12A(a) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter the Act ), vide proceedings dated 30.07.1990. 3. In the assessment year 2012-2013, the petitioner filed an application in Form No.56D on 22.11.2012 seekin...
Tag this Judgment!The Executive Officer Vs. S. Muruga Sivaprakasam and Others
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-28-2016
Common Judgment 1. Being aggrieved over the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, the Appellants have filed the present Writ Appeals. 2. Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the Executive Officer of the temple, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the H.R and C.E. Department. 3. Facts made available herein would reveal that the writ petitioner is said to be the Madathipathi of Sreelasri Chidambara Swamigal Madam, Kannapattai, Thiruporur Taluk, Kancheepuram District, as a successor/nominee of the previous Madathipathi/his father under a registered Will dated 05.02.2001, as per the Scheme.According to the writ petitioner, there is no criminal case nor any other case against him before this Court or any other Court, disqualifying him from functioning as Madathipathi. However, the H.R and C.E. department has not recognised him as Madathipathi. On account of the same, he was unable to function as Tru...
Tag this Judgment!P. Jeyachandran Vs. The District Collector, Madurai and Another
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-28-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to survey the Petitioner's land and to place the survey stones comprised in S.No.24/2A, measuring an extent of 0.55.5 hectare(77 cents) middle portion, out of 1 acre and 37 cents situated at Manickampatti Village, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai North, Alanganallur Sub-Division, Madurai District based on the Petitioner's representation dated 29.6.2016 within the time frame fixed 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. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents. 4. According to the Petitioner, his representation, dated 29.06.2016 addressed to the Second Respondent/The Tahsildar, Vadipatti, Madurai District is pending as on date, without any progress or disposal. In fact, the Petitioner wants a survey to be conducted in respect of the property com...
Tag this Judgment!Subban @ Theerthagiri Vs. State represented by the Inspector of Police
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-28-2016
(Prayer:Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., against the judgment dated 22.12.2015, in S.C.No.86 of 2014 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri.) 1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.86 of 2014 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri. He stood charged for offences under Sections 302 I.P.C., and 25 (1-B) (a) of Indian Arms Act. By judgment dated 22.12.2015, the trial Court convicted the accused under both the charges and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for offence under Section 302 I.P.C., and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 25 (1-B) (a) of Indian Arms Act. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this Criminal Appeal. 2. The cas...
Tag this Judgment!R. Kanagaraj Vs. State represented by Inspector of Police, Annathanapa ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-28-2016
(Prayer: Appeal filed u/s.374 (2) Cr.P.C., against the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court No.1), Salem, in S.C.No.116 of 2011 on 31.01.2012.) V. Bharathidasan, J. 1. The sole accused in S.C.No.116 of 2011 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court No.1), Salem, is the appellant herein. He stood charged for an offence under Section 302 IPC. The trial Court found him guilty of the above said charge and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment. Challenging the above conviction and sentence, the present Appeal has been filed. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is as follows:- (i) The deceased in this case one Rani is the wife of the appellant. Suspecting the fidelity of the deceased, the accused frequently quarrelled with the deceased. On 05.12.2010 at about 5.40 p.m, the appel...
Tag this Judgment!K. Palanivel Vs. The Chairman and Managing Director, TANGEDCO, formerl ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Jul-28-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to appoint the Petitioner to the post of ITI Helper (Trainee) with attendant, service and monetary benefits in the above said post pursuant to the proceedings of the second respondent herein namely, the Chief Engineer (Personnel), Chennai, TANGEDCO, formerly TNEB Limited, bearing No.044771/201/G.57/ G.572/2012-12, dated 28.10.2013.) COMMON ORDER 1. The case of the petitioners are that after completion of the SSLC i.e. 10th standard new pattern public examination, all the petitioners are undergone and completed the course of training at Government Industrial Training Institute at various places and passed the prescribed trade test in the trade of Wireman held in the month of July 1988 and subsequent years and awarded the certificate provisionally to them. They also issued National Trade Certificate by the Government of India. 2.The ...
Tag this Judgment!P. Sivaraman and Another Vs. The District Collector, Pudukkottai Distr ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Jul-28-2016
(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent herein to implement the orders of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Pudukkottai in Na.Ka.4242/2015/A4, dated 27.11.2015 by entering the names of the Petitioners in the revenue records relating to S.Nos.1211/1A1, 1211/2A, 1212/1 and 1212/2A measuring 4.35.5 Hecs equivalent to 10.75 acres situated at Thulayanur Village, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkoittai District, covered by Sale Deed, dated 1.8.2014 vide Doc.No.2155/2014 and granting transfer of patta to the petitioner within a reasonable time, as may be fixed by this Court.) 1. Heard both sides. 2. By consent, the main Writ Petition itself is taken up for final hearing. 3. No counter is filed on behalf of the Respondents. 4. According to the Petitioners, they had purchased the properties in Thulayanur Village, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkoittai District, for a valid sale consideration of Rs.13,0...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »