Allowed

K.James Antonyraj, v. The Managing Director

Madras HC23 Mar 2016WP/10555/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a short order where the Madras High Court directed the first respondent to consider the petitioner's pending representation of 25.02.2016 and pass orders on merits within six weeks. The writ petition was subsequently disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the first respondent to consider the pending representation dated 25.02.2016 and pass orders on merits within six weeks.

K.James Antonyraj, Vs The Managing Director — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 23.03.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶5

WP.No. 10555 of 2016

¶6

K.James Antonyraj ... Petitioner Versus 1. The Managing Director, State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Limited, 19 A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road, Post Box No.7223, Egmore, Chennai – 8. 2. The General Manager, State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Limited, 19 A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road, Post Box No.7223, Egmore, Chennai – 8. 3. M/s.Bhanu Moulds and Dies (P) Ltd., 50, Kayarambedu Village, Guduvancheri, Chengalpattu Taluk, Kanchipuram District, Represented by Power Agent, V.Kovil Pillai. ... Respondents

¶7

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to dispose of the representation of the petitioner, dated 25.02.2016 and consequently, direct the said respondents to issue No Objection Certificate in respect of the property mortgaged by M/s.Bhanu Moulds and Dies (P) Ltd., the third respondent herein.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr. K.N.Pandian For Respondents : Mr.Ramesh Venkatachalapathy, for R1 & R2 Mr.S.Vijayakumar,for R3.

¶9

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

¶10

ORDER

¶11

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to dispose of the representation dated 25.02.2016 and consequently direct the said respondents to issue No Objection Certificate in respect of the property mortgaged by M/s.Bhanu Moulds and Dies (P) Ltd., the third respondent herein.

¶12

It is the case of the petitioner that inspite of the representation given to the respondents 1 and 2 on 25.02.2016, the respondents have not passed any orders in the petitioner's representation.

¶13

Mr. Ramesh Venkatachalapathy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the respondents may be directed to dispose of the representation within six weeks time.

¶14

Mr. S.Vijayakumar, learned counsel appearing for the third respondent has no objection for giving such direction to the respondents 1 and 2.

¶15

In these circumstances, in view of the submission made by the learned counsel on either side, since the representation given by the petitioner is pending from 25.02.2016, without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, I direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.02.2016 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶16

With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶17

mrp

¶18

s/d-

¶19

Assistant Registrar(CS-III)

¶20

True Copy

¶21

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶22

¶23

The Managing Director, State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Limited, 19 A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road, Post Box No.7223, Egmore,

¶24

Chennai – 8.

¶25

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

¶26

The General Manager,

¶27

State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Limited, 19 A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road, Post Box No.7223, Egmore,

¶28

Chennai – 8.

¶29

- 1 cc to M/s.Ramesh Venkatachalapathi, Advocate, SR 18670

¶30

- 1 cc to Mr.S.Vijayakumar, Advocate, SR 18643

¶31

- 1 cc to Mr.K.N.Pandiyan, Advocate SR 18644

¶32

rsi(co) prk24/3 W.P.No.10555 of 2016

¶33

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

K.James Antonyraj, v. The Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.James Antonyraj, v. The Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Kanagaraj Vs The District Collector

Tvl. Mertho Constructions, Vs The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

M/s. Pulkit Metals Pvt. Ltd, Vs The Deputy Commercial Tax

Tvl. First Med Therapeuties Vs The Deputy Commercial Tax

Tvl.Thangam Agencies Vs The Commercial Tax Officer

Muthian Sivathanu Vs Nalini Muthuian