V.Kaliappan, v. S.Murugam
Case brief
What is this about?
This order disposed of a miscellaneous petition seeking leave to prefer a writ appeal. The court directed the 4th respondent to issue notice to the petitioner, consider relevant documents, and complete the enquiry regarding the license grant.
What did the court decide?
Directed the 4th respondent to issue notice to the petitioner and respondent No.1, consider documents, conduct enquiry, and submit a report to the 2nd respondent.
What the court decided
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 20.04.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
C.M.P.(MD).No.3250 of 2017 IN W.A.[MD].(SR)No.14292 of 2017
V.Kaliappan : Petitioner/ Appellant sought to prefer WA(MD) SR 14292/17
Vs.
1.S.Murugan,
- 2.The General Manager(Administration), (District Revenue Officer)
Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation Ltd., 11/22, Mangkadusamy Street,
Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to notice while the enquiry conducted by the 4th respondent continues regarding the local cable operator license dispute.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
V.Kaliappan
- respondent
S.Murugan
Coram
T.S.Sivagnanam
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court