The Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was dismissed as infructuous because an endorsement made on the impugned proceedings rendered the petition devoid of any prayer or purpose.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:13.12.2011
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.BASHA W.P.(MD).No.3868 of 2011 and M.P.No.1 of 2011
S.ArputhaMary :Petitioner
-Vs-
PRAYER :Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records from the first respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.A7/1161/2011 dated 22.03.2011 and quash the same.
For Petitioner :Mr.N.Sathishbabu
For Respondents:Mr.Ayiram K.Selvakumar,Government Advocate
ORDER
The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the prayer that has been sought for by the petitioner has become infructuous.
2.In view of the endorsement made and as per the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (CO)
/ TRUE COPY /
Sub Assistant Registrar
To:
RR W.P.(MD).No.3868 of 2011 and M.P.No.1 of 2011 RP/29.12.11/1P/4C. 13.12.2011.
S.ArputhaMary
The Inspector of Panchayats & The District Collector, Sivagangai District
The Project Directorate, (District Rural Development Authority), Sivagangai District
The Block Development Officer(Village Panchayat), Kalayarkoil Panchayat Union
D.Arockiam
K.N.Basha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
