Dismissed

Thiru.C.Kadirvelu, I.R.S., v. the Sub Registrar

Madras HC8 Dec 2016WP/19710/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing the third respondent to initiate steps following instructions from the second respondent. The High Court heard the matter and dismissed the petition, leaving the remedy open to be worked out in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

Thiru.C.Kadirvelu, I.R.S., Vs the Sub Registrar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 08.12.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

WP.No.19710 of 2013

¶6

Thiru.C.Kadirvelu,I.R.S., Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Retd), 34,Old No.63A Kamaraj Nagar, 3^rd Street, Choolaimedu, Chennai 600 094. ... Petitioner -Vs-

¶7

1.The Sub-Registrar, Pernambut Registrar Office, Pernambut-635 810. 2.The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai 600 028.

¶8

3.The District Registrar, (Administration), Department of Registration, For,Vellore-632204. .. Respondents

¶9

PRAYER: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 3^rd respondent to initiate necessary steps pursuant to the directions/instructions of the 2^nd respondent in his communication No.54587/U1/2012 dated 30-04-2013.

¶10

For Petitioner : Ms.C.N.G.Ezhilarasi For Respondents : Mr.S.Navaneetham, AGP

¶11

ORDER Heard Ms.C.N.G.Ezhilarasi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Navaneetham, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. With the consent of either side, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

¶12

2.The petitioner seeks for issuance of Writ of Mandamus to directing the 3^rd respondent to initiate necessary steps pursuant to the directions/instructions of the 2^nd respondent in his

¶13

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

¶14

communication No.54587/U1/2012 dated 30.04.2013.

¶15

3.Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that pending this writ petition, the petitioner was called for an inquiry by the second respondent. Therefore, the department has initiated the proceedings.

¶16

4.Learned Additional Government Pleader would submits that the complaint of the petitioner will be looked in accordance with law.

¶17

5.Therefore, in view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed. It is open to the petitioner to workout his remedy in accordance with law. No costs.

¶18

Sd/Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar KP To 1.The Sub-Registrar, Pernambut Registrar Office, Pernambut-635 810. 2.The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai 600 028. 3.The District Registrar, (Administration), Department of Registration, For,Vellore-632204. +1cc to Mr.C.N.G. Ezhilarasi, Advocate, S.R.No.72251 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.72642

¶19

GJ(CO) md(24/01/2017)

¶20

W.P.No.19710 of 2013

¶21

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

Thiru.C.Kadirvelu, I.R.S., v. the Sub Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thiru.C.Kadirvelu, I.R.S., v. the Sub Registrar

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

V.Mani Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Subramaniam, Vs the Chairman

R.Sivaprakasam, Vs the Commissioner

Joshmitha, D/O.Jothimani, Vs Union of India

Ranipet Labour Union, Reg. Vs

M/S. Chamundi Steel Castings Vs Tamil Nadu Generation and