Chennai Court August 2016 Judgments
Petitioner Vs. Respondent
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-31-2016
T. Raja, J. 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that earlier when the petitioner filed W.P.No.4570 of 2006 for alternative employment, this Court, by an order dated 31.07.2006, directed the respondents not to assign seat work to the petitioner, due to his mental illness. Pursuant to the orders of this court, the petitioner was posted as Assistant in the Divisional Excise Office, Theni, which involves collection of money, however, by impugned order dated 10.08.2016, the petitioner has been transferred and posted at the office of the Special Tahsildar, SIBCOT Unit 3, Bodinayakkanur at Theni, which is having a full time desk work. 2. In view of the difficulty expressed by the petitioner, the learned Govt. Advocate is directed to get specific instruction whether the petitioner could be accommodated in a post which is having no desk work. 3. Post the matter on 06.09.2016....
Tag this Judgment!V. Balasubramaniam Junior Assistant, Diamond Jubilee Higher secondary ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-31-2016
(Prayer in W.P.No.30315 of 2016:Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records connected with the impugned proceeding of the 4th respondent vide Na.Ka.No.750/Aa3/2016, dated 01.07.2016, and quash the same and direct the respondents to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Junior Assistant in the 5th respondent school w.e.f. 20.01.2016, with all consequential benefits, in the light of the order passed in W.A.(MD) No.928 of 2010 dated 11.01.2011.) Common Order: By consent, the Writ Petitions are taken up for disposal at the stage of admission itself. Since the issue involved in all these petitions pertain to grant of approval of the petitioners, who are Non-teaching staff in the school, they are taken up together and a common order is passed. 2. According to the petitioners, all the posts held by them are sanctioned post. The vacancy arose right from the year 2009. The contention...
Tag this Judgment!Postal Accounts Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe Employees' Welfare A ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-31-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Certiorari filed Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the order of the sixth respondent which is made in O.A.No.539 of 2010 dated 17-08-2011 and quash the same, consequent to direct the respondents 1 to 5 to maintain circle wise roster points in respect of AAO cadre and to pass orders.) A. Selvam, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Certiorari fied mandamus calling for records relating to the order of the sixth respondent, passed in O.A.No.539 of 2010 dated 17-08-2011 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent Nos.1 to 5 to maintain circle-wise roster points in respect of Assistant Accounts Officer('AAO' in short) Cadre. 2. The petitioners herein as applicants have filed O.A.No.539 of 2010 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench wherein the present respondents have ...
Tag this Judgment!M. Sundaramoorthy and Another Vs. Minor Iswaryalakshmi rep.by her moth ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-31-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition is filed, under Sections 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C., to set aside the order passed in M.C.No. 42 of 2010, dated 13.03.2014, on the file of the learned Family Court of Madurai. Prayer: (Crl.R.C.(MD) No.288 of 2014): Criminal Revision Petition is filed, under Sections 397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to the order passed by the Family Court, Madurai in M.C.No.42 of 2010, dated 13.03.2014, and set aside the same.) 1. As these two revisions are directed as against the very same order passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C., and the factual matrix and legal issues are intermixed, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Crl.R.C.(MD) No.253 of 2014 has been filed by a father as against his daughter in granting her monthly maintenance at Rs.3,000/- in M.C.No.42 of 2010, by the learned Judge, Family Court, Madurai. 3. Crl.R.C.(MD) No.288 of 2014 has been filed by the wife as against her husband in the said Court havin...
Tag this Judgment!Perumal Raja @ Perumal Vs. State Rep. By The Inspector of Police, Pudu ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-31-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. challenging the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Puducherry, in S.C.No.22 of 2014 dated 07.04.2016.) S. Nagamuthu, J. 1. The appellant is Accused No.1 in S.C.No.22 of 2014 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Puducherry. Totally, there were five accused in the above said case including the appellant herein. A2 absconded during the pendency of the committal proceedings and, therefore, case as against him was split up and numbered as P.R.C.No.11 of 2013. The rank of the accused was, however, not altered. Thus, A1 and A3 to A5 faced the trial. The trial court framed as many as three charges against A1 and A3 to A5. The first charge was under Section 302 r/w 34 of IPC; the second charge was under Section 201 r/w 302 of IPC; and the third charge was under Section 380 r/w 34 of IPC as against A1 and A3 to A5. The trial court, by judgement dated 07.04.2016, a...
Tag this Judgment!N. Kothandapani Vs. The District Collector, Tiruchirapalli District an ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-31-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the fourth respondent to communicate the result of the test conducted on the sample of Siddha Medicine collected at the time of his inspection dated 10.06.2009.) K.K. Sasidharan, J. 1. The learned counsel for the petitioner has made an endorsement indicating that the petitioner is withdrawing the Writ Petition. 2. In view of the endorsement so made, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs....
Tag this Judgment!District Registrar, Chennai and Others Vs. M/s. Lebara Hotels Pvt.Ltd. ...
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-31-2016
(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 27.5.2016 passed in W.P.No.15762 of 2016 on the file of this court.) Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties for some time. 2. The writ appeal is filed challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge in quashing the order passed by the third appellant herein and directing to register the sale deed submitted by the first respondent herein and release the same. 3. It appears that the sale deed submitted by the writ petitioner/first appellant herein was withheld by the registering authority on the ground that during the course of audit objection, it was found that there was revenue loss to the tune of Rs.1,43,00,000/- as deficit stamp duty and Rs.10,99,975/- as deficit registration fees. It also appears that the sale deed in respect of the second respondent herein, the vendor of the first respondent was originally withheld on the ground of deficit s...
Tag this Judgment!M/s Selvin Jeyakumar Vs. The Commercial Tax Officer
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-31-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS to call for the records on the file of the respondent in TIN 33376163947/2012-13 dated 16.06.2016 and to quash the same as illegal arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural justice and against the judgment report in (2015) 82 VST 457 in the case of Tvl. Infiniti Wholesale Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner (CT) Koyambedu Assessment Circle, Chennai, and direct the respondent to pass assessment order afresh after affording a opportunity of being heard to the petitioner by considering the reply dated 11.04.2016 filed by the petitioner and the circular issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chennai in Circular No.54/2014 Ref.No.D3/34875/2014 dated 14.11.2014 within such time as may be directed by this Court.) 1. M/s Selvin Jeyakumar, who is engaged in the business of executing works contract for the various departments of State Government,...
Tag this Judgment!R. Thirumalai, Sub-Inspector of Police, Tirunelveli Vs. The Director G ...
Court: Chennai Madurai
Decided on: Aug-30-2016
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion as Inspector of Police without reference to the pending disciplinary proceedings in C.No.B1/12441/2005 P.R.No.25/B1/2005, dated 18.11.2005 and promote him as Inspector of Police and grant him all consequential service and monetary benefits.) 1. This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion as Inspector of Police without reference to the pending disciplinary proceedings in C.No.B1/12441/2005 P.R.No.25/B1/2005, dated 18.11.2005 and promote him as Inspector of Police and grant him all consequential service and monetary benefits. 2. The brief facts as set out in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition are as follows: 2.1. The petitioner entered in service as Sub Inspector of Police by direct recruitm...
Tag this Judgment!G. Swaminathan Vs. Y. Babu and Another
Court: Chennai
Decided on: Aug-30-2016
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C. to set aside the order dated 29.03.2016 made in CA.No.25 of 2015 passed by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore confirming the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate (FTC No.II, Magisterial level), Coimbatore made in STC.No.184 of 2012 dated 08.01.2015.) 1. This Criminal Revision is directed against the order passed by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore made in CA.No.25 of 2015, dated 29.03.2016 confirming the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate (FTC No.II, Magisterial level), Coimbatore made in STC.No.184 of 2012, dated 08.01.2015. 2. The brief facts of the case is as follows :- The respondents is the complainant, preferred complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before the learned Judicial Magistrate in STC.No.184 of 2012, in which he has stated that the revision petitioner has borrowed a sum of Rs.3,75,000...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »