Petitioner filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 seeking mandatory direction to dispose a representation. The court found no appearance by the petitioner on two hearing dates and dismissed the petition for non-prosecution.
The Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 14.12.2016
CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN W.P.No. 31697 of 2016
A.Baskar ..Petitioner Vs. 1. The District Registrar, Saidapet Registrar Office Building, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 009. 2. Srinivasan 3. Sivashankar ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to dispose the representation dated 20.04.2016 sent by the petitioner within the stipulated time limit. For Petitioner : No appearance O R D E R When the Writ Petition was taken up for hearing on 05.12.2016, there was no representation for the petitioner. Therefore, the Writ Petition was directed to be posted under the caption 'for dismissal'. Even today, there is no representation for the petitioner. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/Assistant Registrar //True Copy// vsi Sub Assistant Registrar
To
The District Registrar, Saidapet Registrar Office Building, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 009.
RJ(CO) Rs(12/01/2017)
W.P.No. 31697 of 2016
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Writ Petition praying for disposal of a representation should be allowed in the absence of the petitioner.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
A.Baskar
District Registrar, Saidapet
Srinivasan
Sivashankar
Justice B. Rajendran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
