Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR2005Mad377; 2005(2)CTC182
ORDERP. Sathasivam, J.1. Higher Education Department of State of Tamil Nadu, Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirapalli, aggrieved by the common order of the learned Single Judge dated 25.11.2004, made in W. P. No. 27030/2004, etc., batch, directing the Universities to consider the applications submitted by the petitioner-Institution for grant of affiliation for conducting teacher training course for the academic year 2004-2005 without insisting on the production of the No Objection Certificate from the State Government, have filed the above Writ Appeals. Since the issues raised in all the Writ Appeals are one and the same, they are being disposed of by the following order.2. For convenience, we shall refer the facts leading to the filing of Writ Appeal No. 4204/2004, filed by Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirapalli. Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Educational and Charitable Trust, Perambalur, aggrieved by the proceedings of the Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirapalli dated 23.9.2004 declining...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
J U D G M E N T1. The Hon ble the Chief JusticeSince, in all these writ appeals, which are 27 in number, a common question of interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 and the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act 20 of 1999 has to be answered, they have been heard together and answered by this common judgment. All these appeals arose out of separate judgements delivered by learned single Judges in various writ petitions filed by aggrieved land owners. Almost all the writ petitions have been allowed mainly on the ground that physical possession of the lands continued with the land owners or the persons claiming through them. The factual details of each case have been discussed in the latter part of this judgment.2. The State, which is the appellant in all but three appeals, has assailed the impugned judgments rendered by the writ courts as being illegal and wholly without jurisdiction. Mr. S. Gomathinay...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2007(2)CTC369
ORDERP.D. Dinakaran, J.I. PREFATORY CAVEAT1. The meat of the matter is the tussle between eco-environmental maintenance and vigorous industrialization. To answer as to the need of the day for the right to life, viz., whether we should maintain eco-friendly environment or opt for prosperous economic growth, neither the eco-environment alone nor the industrial and economic growth by itself will meet the human needs in the global competition. Then, what is desirable is a sustainable development, by being resilient, but not rigid; organic, but not static; liberal, but not strict; wider, but not narrow, as to both eco-friendly environment and prosperous industrial development, that are to be worked out harmoniously, to meet the challenges in global economic competition and in order to meet the ends of socio-economic justice. And the core of the dispute raised is, whether the acquisition of lands impugned in these writ petitions for Petrochemical Park, a major industrial project, satisfies t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2008(1)CTC545; AIR2008Mad127; 2008(3)AIRKarR210(FB); 2008(1)MLJ1217
ORDERA.P. Shah, C.J.1. This case has been referred to the Full Bench as the Division Bench found that there is divergence of opinion and, particularly, the ratio of the Division Bench decision in The University of Madras v. Loordhu Ammal Educational Trust and Anr. 2005 W.L.R 395 cannot be reconciled with the decision of the other Division Bench in Vinayaka Missions College of Nursing and Para-Medical Sciences v. The Tamil Nadu Nurses and Midwives Council : (2006)4MLJ753 .2. The challenge in the present petition is to the order of the second respondent Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, dated 08.8.2007, by which the University has granted provisional affiliation to Rukmani College of Education started by the petitioner Trust for running B.Ed. Course with an intake of 100 students for the academic year 2007-2008. The petitioner has questioned the order of the second respondent University on the ground that the petitioner is entitled for grant of affiliation for B.Ed. Course from the acad...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (2007)5MLJ376
A.C. Arumugaperumal Adityan, J.1. This Appeal Suit has been preferred against the Judgment and Decree in O.S. No. 7811 of 1996 passed by the II Additional City Civil Court, Chennai. The plaintiff who has lost his case before the trial Court has preferred this appeal. The suit is for declaration that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit property, for consequential injunction and for mandatory injunction to remove the fence put up by the defendant in the suit property.2. The short facts of the case of the plaintiff in the plaint relevant for the purpose of deciding this appeal sans irrelevant particulars are as follows:The Assistant Commissioner of Urban and Land Tax Kundrathur, Chennai had initiated proceedings in respect of the suit property in RC. No. 3831/85A dated 27/28.4.1989 under the Tamilnadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. Against this, the plaintiff had filed Writ Petition No. 6686/1989 to quash the proceedings and also sought stay of all further proc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Prayer: Writ petitions are filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of a Wit of Certiorari, calling for the concerned records from the 2nd respondent, quash notices of the 2nd respondent bearing Ku.Ka.No.701/Ni.Pi.5/U3/Ko.Po.Ka.Sa/2011 dated 10.11.2011.O R D E R1. The petitioners pray for quashing of notices issued by the Superintending Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation, calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why their services be not dismissed for submitting bogus educational certificates.2. The petitioners in these petitions, joined the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and services of the petitioners now stand transferred to the Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation on bifurcation of the Board.3. The facts leading to filing of this writ petition, read that;i) The petitioners were initially appointed on contract basis. The decision was taken by the respondents to absorb the services of the employees, keeping in view...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : [1999]97CompCas582(Mad); 1998(3)CTC589
ORDER1. All these eight appeals arise out of the orders passed by the Company Law Board, Principal Bench, New Delhi in two company petitions, namely, C.P.No. 45 of 1993 and C.P.No. 16 of 1994, dated 12.5.1998.2. C.M.A.Nos. 1071, 1207, 1208 and 1210 of 1998 are preferred against the order in C.P.No.16 of 1994, while C.M.A.Nos.1072, 1073, 1149 and 1209 are preferred against the order in C.P.No.45 of 1993. The main dispute relates to the affairs of M/s. Gordon Woodroffe & Company Limited (GWL), a sick company now before the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) In C.M.A.No.1071 of 1998, M/s. Gordon Woodroffe & Company Limited, U.K. the petitioner in C.P.No.16 of 1994 is the appellant. In C.M.A.No.1207 of 1998, Kishore Rajaram Chhabria, Madan Dwarakdas Chhabria and Rajaram Dwarakdas Chhabria, the respondents 4 to 6 in C.P.No.16 of 1994 are the appellants. In C.M.A.No.1208 of 1998, Tracstar Investments (P) Ltd., the second respondent in C.P.No.16 of 1994 is the appellant....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1998(3)CTC236; (2001)8SCC676; AIR2001SC2861
ORDERJudgement Pronounced by Shivaraj Patil, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. In these appeals, in the tight of the contentions raised by the parties, the only question that needs to be answered is, whether Bharathidasan University, Palkalai Perur, Tiruchirappalli in this State of Tamil Nadu, should seek approval of AH India Council for Technical Education to start technicalcourses in the University or to start a Technical Institute to conduct technical courses. For convenience, hereafter we will refer to the said University as 'University' and the All India Council for Technical Education as 'Council'.3. Writ Appeal No.1308 of 1998 is filed by the University and Bharathidasan Institute for Engineering and Technology. Writ Appeal No.1309 of 1998 is filed by a student, who was respondent No.4, impleaded in the Writ Petition No.14558 of 1998 and Writ Appeal No.1326 of 1998 is filed by another student, who was not a party in the writ petition, but after seeking leave from...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1999(1)CTC301; [1999(81)FLR1008]; (1999)ILLJ308Mad; (1999)IMLJ424
ORDER1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred against the proceedings No.Aa2/Pa.Le.No.145/95, dated 21.1.1997 and issued on 9.6.1998 by the Additional Registrar-II of Trade Unions and Deputy Commissioner of Labour-II, D.M.S. Compound, Teynampet, Chennai-6.2. The impugned order has been passed by the first respondent cancelling the registration of the Neyveli National workers Union, the first appellant herein.3. The case of the first appellant is that the first appellant Union was registered under the Trade Unions Act, 1926, affiliated to Indian National Trade Union Congress (for short 'TNTUC') having its head office at G.R. Bhawan, II Floor, No.45, Royapettah High Road, Chennai-14. The Union was started with the object of securing rights, privilege and immunities and other protection to its member and also to maintain Industrial peace in the Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited, a Government of India undertaking. The appellant's Union branch is situated at No.D-12, Mahathma...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2006(2)CTC241; (2006)3MLJ129
P.K. Misra, J.1. The factual background as culled out from various writ petitions and the counter affidavit is as follows:-Mr. R. Nataraj has been functioning as the Commissioner of Police, Chennai, since 18.9.2004. It seems for publication in Chennai Chronicle - a supplement of the Newspaper Deccan Chroncile on 8.3.2006, which was being observed as International Womens Day, R. Nataraj was contacted by a representative of such newspaper to give his opinion regarding an ideal woman. As per the newspaper report, R. Nataraj has stated:An ideal woman is someone who manages both her personal and professional life well. In this respect, I think our chief minister J. Jayalalitha is the perfect example of the ideal woman.I think she is an icon and every woman should look up to her.Thereafter, publication of such comment in the newspaper appears to have been brought to the notice of the Election Commission. (It is claimed by Mr. A. Raja, a Minister in the Union Government, that it is he who bro...
Tag this Judgment!