Dismissed

Maya Appliances Ltd. v. Govt. of India Rep by Secy to

Madras HC5 Dec 2016WP/11745/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed two writ petitions as having become infructuous. Counsel for the petitioner conceded that the underlying matters had become infructuous, leading to the dismissal of the applications under Article 226 regarding a quashing order and an ultra vires challenge to specific sections of the Interest on Delayed Payments Act.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions were dismissed as having become infructuous. Costs awarded to the respondents.

Maya Appliances Ltd. Vs Govt. of India Rep by… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 05.12.2016

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.N. PRAKASH

¶5

W.P. Nos.11745 and 11747 of 2001

¶6

Maya Appliances Ltd. No.8, Boat Club Road I Avenue Chennai 600 028 Petitioner in both the WPs. vs.

¶7

1 The Government of India represented by the Secretary to Government of India Department of Small Scale Industries and Agre and Rural Industries

¶8

2 The Sate of Tamil Nadu represented by its Secretary Small Industries Department Fort St. George Chennai 600 009

¶9

3 The Regional Industry Facilitation Council No.47 Anna Salai Chennai 600 002

¶10

4 The Regional Joint Director of Industries & Commerce No.47 Anna Salai Chennai 600 002

¶11

5 Pyro Systems (Pt) Ltd. Type II/16, Dr. V.S.I. Estate Thiruvanmiyur Chennai 600 041 Respondents in both the WPs.

¶12

W.P. No.11745 of 2001:

¶13

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the fourth respondent's letter dated 09.03.2001 bearing no.RC No.2243/A5/2001 and quash the same and direct the respondents 3 and 4 to forbear from proceeding further in the matter.

¶14

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

¶15

W.P. No.11747 of 2001:

¶16

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of declaration declaring Section 6(2) and 7(c) of the Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993 and the rules framed thereunder by the 2nd respondent and known as the Tamil Nadu Industry Facilitation Council Rules, 2000 as ultra vires and unconstitutional.

¶17

For R1 No appearance in both the WPs

¶18

For RR 2 to 4 Mr. S. Gunasekaran
in both the WPs Addl. Govt. Pleader
For R5 Mr. B.S. Gnanadesikan
in both the WPs
- - - - -

¶19

Today, when these writ petitions were taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner fairly conceded that both the matters have become infructuous and he has also made an endorsement to that effect.

¶20

2 In view of the above submission and endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, these writ petitions are dismissed as having become infructuous. Costs made easy.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar

//True Copy//

cad To