Allowed

S.Rajendran, v. the Tamilnadu State

Madras HC3 Feb 2015CRP(MD)/149/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this civil revision petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Madras High Court directed the Principal District Judge, Dindigul, to dispose of an Election Original Petition on merits within two months and report compliance.

What did the court decide?

The Principal District Judge is directed to dispose of the Election Original Petition in E.O.P.No.7 of 2012 on merits within two months and report compliance.

S.Rajendran, Vs the Tamilnadu State — Election Law | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

S.Rajendran

¶3

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED 03.02.2015 CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA

¶5

C.R.P(MD)No.149 of 2015

¶6

... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1.The Tamil Nadu State Election Commission, Chennai.

¶9

2.The District Election Officer cum District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

¶10

3.The Returning Officer cum The Project Director, District Rural Development Agency, Office of the District Collector, Dindigul District.

¶11

4.M.Kumaresan

¶12

5.V.Senthil Kumar ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to direct the learned Principal District Judge, Dindigul to expedite the trial and dispose of Election Original Petition in E.O.P.No.7 of 2012 within a stipulated time, as fixed by this court.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Balamurugan

¶15

ORDER

¶16

This Civil Revision Petition is filed for a limited purpose of seeking a direction for the disposal of the Election Original Petition in E.O.P.No.7 of 2012 on the file of the Principal District Court, Dindigul at an early date.

¶17

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶18

Earlier this Court, vide order dated 30.10.2013 in C.R.P(MD) No.1913 of 2013, directed the Principal District Judge, Dindigul, to dispose of the Election Original Petition in E.O.P.No.7 of 2012 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Against the said order, a review petition was filed, which was later, dismissed as withdrawn.

¶19

From the records, it is seen that on 21.02.2014, P.W.1 was crosshttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ examined in part by the fourth respondent's counsel and the case was adjourned to 01.03.2014. Thereafter, it had been periodically adjourned

¶20

¶21

and the Principal District Judge, Dindigul has sought for extension of time before this Court. But, unfortunately, the Registry has lost sight and hence, the extension was not granted.

¶22

As a last and final chance, the Principal District Judge, Dindigul is directed to dispose of the Election Original Petition in E.O.P.No.7 of 2012 on merits, possibly, by taking it on day-today basis and dispose of the Election Original Petition in E.O.P.No.7 of 2012 on merits and in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and report compliance to this Court.

¶23

Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs. Sd/-

¶24

Assistant Registrar(T & P)

¶25

\True copy\

¶26

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶27

¶28

The Principal District Judge, Dindigul.

¶29

+1cc to MR.S.BALAMURUGAN, ADVOCATE SR.NO.5080

¶30

C.R.P(MD)No.149 of 2015 03.02.2015

¶31

¶32

NA/25/02/2015/P2/3C

¶33

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Rajendran, v. the Tamilnadu State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Rajendran, v. the Tamilnadu State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.Samsudeen, Vs Sakunthala

Y.Baskar, Vs P.Chithambaram

K.Abraham Raju, Vs K.Murugadhas

P. Parvathy(Died), Vs Devadhass

K. Nagarajan, Vs Thiru. S. Anbalagan

K.Uthirakumar, Vs Sivasankaramoorthy