Dismissed

R.Venkatesan, v. The Divisional Engineer

Madras HC23 Jun 2016WP/17235/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Certiorari and Mandamus was taken up. The petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition, which was granted. The Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the Writ Petition was granted; Writ Petition dismissed as withdrawn.

R.Venkatesan, Vs The Divisional Engineer — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 23.06.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN

¶5

W.P.No. 17235 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.14712 of 2016

¶6

R.Venkatesan .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Divisional Engineer Highways and Rural Works Department Villupuram Villupuram District. 2.The Divisional Engineer Highways Department (Construction and Maintenance) Gingee Villupuram District. 3.Assistant Divisional Engineer High Ways (Construction and Maintenance) Highways Department Vandavasi. .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the order No.1700/2012/Kamukkam, dated 12.11.2015 passed by the 3^rd respondent and order No.1710/2012/Aa.3, dated 06.04.2016 passed by the 1^st respondent and quash the same and consequently, to direct the 1^st respondent to drop all further proceedings initiated against the petitioner in pursuance of the charge memo No.Ku.No.1710/2012-Aa.2, dated 21.09.2012, issued by the 1^st respondent and to pass such further order as this Court deem fit in the circumstances of this case. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Gnanasekar For Respondents : Mr.A.Kumar Special Government Pleader

¶7

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

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

The learned counsel for the petitioner had given a letter to the registry, dated 21-06-2016, seeking to list the matter under the caption “For withdrawal”. Today, when the matter is taken up, the learned counsel for the petitioner had sought the permission of this Court to withdraw this Writ Petition. He has also made an endorsement to that effect.

¶10

In view of the above, permission is granted to withdraw this Writ Petition and accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶11

paa Sd/-
Asst.Registrar
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
To
1.The Divisional Engineer
Highways and Rural Works Department
Villupuram
Villupuram District.
2.The Divisional Engineer
Highways Department
(Construction and Maintenance)
Gingee
Villupuram District.
3.Assistant Divisional Engineer
High Ways (Construction and Maintenance)
Highways Department
Vandavasi.
+ 1 cc to Mr.M.Gnanasekar, Advocate Sr 35117
KR/14/7/16
W.P.No.17235 of 2016

¶12

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

R.Venkatesan, v. The Divisional Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Venkatesan, v. The Divisional Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Selvakumar, Vs The Director of Town

G.Rajasekaran, Vs The Government of Tamilnadu

M.Kannan Vs The Commissioner

K.Ravi Vs Oil & Natural Gas

Mr. v.Baskaran, Vs The Additional Director

S.Henry Christy Raj, Vs The Government of Tamilnadu