The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the 2nd and 3rd respondents to implement an order dated 16.09.2013 granting permission to receive cable TV signals. The court recorded submissions and closed the petition without orders.
No order as to costs; the writ petition is closed.
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.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 07.11.2016
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
Writ Petition (MD) No.11936 of 2015
M.Surendiran ... Petitioner
Vs.
3.The District Cable Operator, Tamil Nadu Arasu cable TV Corporation Ltd., 15-A, Forest Road, Sivaji Nagar, Theni, Theni District.
4.E.Aravindan ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to implement the order dated 16.09.2013 passed by the 1st Respondent in No. 18173/Ta.a.Ke.TV/Local channel/2013 for providing cable TV signal to the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Perumal For Respondents : Mr.Abdul Saleem for Mr.S.Satheesh Kumar for RR-1 to 3
Mrs.A.Habiza for R-4
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking a direction, directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to implement the order dated 16.09.2013 passed by the 1st Respondent in No. 18173/Ta.a.Ke.TV/Local channel/2013 for providing cable TV signal to the petitioner.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.The grievance of the petitioner is that earlier, the first respondent, by an order dated 16.09.2013 granted permission to the petitioner to get cable TV connection. But the fourth respondent is not
2
allowing him to take the Arasu Cable TV signals from the existing cable lines. In these circumstances, he has filed the present writ petition.
3.Mr.Abdul Saleem, learned counsel appearing for the Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation submitted that the second respondent will consider the issue and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law.
4.Recording the said submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents, the writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(W)
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
3.The District Cable Operator, Tamil Nadu Arasu cable TV Corporation Ltd., 15-A, Forest Road, Sivaji Nagar, Theni, Theni District.
+1 cc to M/S.V.PERUMAL, Advocate SR.No.66708
Writ Petition (MD) No.11936 of 2015 07.11.2016
SMA/PV/14.12.2016:2P/5C
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the 2nd and 3rd respondents are directed to implement the order dated 16.09.2013 for providing cable TV signal to the petitioner.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M.Surendiran
Tamil Nadu ARASU Cable T.V. Corporation Ltd.
Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation Ltd, Deputy Manager
Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation Ltd, District Cable Operator
E.Aravindan
V.Bharithidasan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
