Disposed

P.Noor Mohammed, v. the Chairman

Madras HC8 Feb 2016WP(MD)/2439/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition filed under Article 226, the petitioner challenged an election notice and sought directions for conducting an election. The Court directed the first respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation on merits expeditiously while reserving opinion on the merits of the main issue.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the First Respondent to pass orders on the petitioner's representation of 25.01.2016 expeditiously after giving notice to interested parties.

P.Noor Mohammed, Vs the Chairman — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 08.02.2016

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN

¶6

W.P(MD).No.2439 of 2016

¶7

P.Noor Mohammed ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Chairman,

¶10

Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, No.1, Jafar Syrang Road,

¶11

Vallal Seethakathi Nagar,

¶12

Chennai – 1.

¶13

2.The Chief Executive Officer,

¶14

Tamil Nadu Wakf Board,

¶15

No.1, Jafar Syrang Road,

¶16

Vallal Seethakathi Nagar,

¶17

Chennai – 1.

¶18

3.The Election Officer/Wakf Superintendent, Wakf Board Office,

¶19

Trichy.

¶20

... Respondents

¶21

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned notice of the 3^rd respondent in Na.Ka.G.S.No.527/The.A/VaKa/Trichy dated 24.01.2016 and quash the same as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to fix a date for nomination to the election scheduled to be held on 14.02.2016 for Mohaideen Aandavar Pallivasal Jamad (G.S.No.527) Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukottai District and conduct the same in proper manner within a time frame as fixed by this Court.

¶22

For petitioner : Mr.S.Sukumar For Respondents : Mr.K.K.Senthil

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Challenging the impugned notice of the 3^rd respondent in Na.Ka.G.S.No.527/The.A/VaKa/Trichy dated 24.01.2016, the petitioner has come to this Court and for consequential direction to the respondents to fix a date for nomination to the election scheduled to be held on 14.02.2016 for Mohaideen Aandavar Pallivasal Jamad (G.S.No.527) Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukottai District and conduct the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ same in proper manner.

¶25

¶26

Mr.K.K.Senthil, learned Standing Counsel takes notice for the respondents.

¶27

By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶28

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that it would suffice if the representation of the petitioner is disposed of, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶29

In view of the limited scope of the prayer, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue involved, the first respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 25.01.2016 on merits and in accordance with law, after giving notice to the interested parties, if any, as expeditiously as possible. This order should not be construed as giving any positive direction to the respondents and the respondents shall pass orders, independently, depending on the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶30

With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

Assistant Registrar(Crl.Side)

¶33

/True Copy/

¶34

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶35

¶36

1.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board,

¶37

No.1, Jafar Syrang Road, Vallal Seethakathi Nagar, Chennai – 1.

¶38

2.The Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, No.1, Jafar Syrang Road, Vallal Seethakathi Nagar, Chennai – 1.

¶39

3.The Election Officer/Wakf Superintendent, Wakf Board Office, Trichy.

¶40

+1cc to Mr.S.Sukumar, Advocate Sr.No.7754

¶41

+1cc to Mr.K.K.Senthil, Advocate Sr.No.7576

¶42

akm/09.02.2016/ 2p- 6c/jgb/dp/SAR-I

¶43

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

¶44

W.P(MD).No.2439 of 2016 08.02.2016

P.Noor Mohammed, v. the Chairman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Noor Mohammed, v. the Chairman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

All Government Contractors Vs the District Collector

Subramaniyan, Vs the Regional Manager

Shri Jothilingam Pattu Mahal Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

R.Kalyanasundari Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

A.Muniammal Vs the Electrical Engineer(Distn)

Patchaiammal, Vs the Inspector of Registration