The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to adjust a sum paid for guinea grass removal. The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous by the court due to the long passage of time and the petitioner's own endorsement.
Writ petition dismissed as infructuous. No costs awarded.
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: 14.07.2017
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P.No.14786 of 2004
G.Sivaraman ...Petitioner
vs.
The Commissioner, Madurai City Municipal Corporation, Aringnar Anna Malaigai, Madurai – 2. ...Respondent
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to seeking Writ of Mandamus, directing the responding to adjust the money i.e. a sum of Rs.3,83,000/- paid by the petitioner towards the payment for cutting and removing guinea grass from Plot No.6 Avaniyapuram Sewage Water farm, Madurai, calculating at the rate of Rs.200/- per ton on par with outsiders.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Ananthapadmanabhan For Respondent : Mr.P.Srinivasan ORDER
The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition has now become infructuous due to the long passage of time. He has also made an endorsement to that effect.
Sub Asst. Registrar
Pam
To
The Commissioner, Madurai City Municipal Corporation, Aringnar Anna Malaigai, Madurai – 2.
+1cc Government Pleader in sr.no.50136
W.P.No.14786 of 2004
NR 27/07/2017
G.Sivaraman
The Commissioner, Madurai City Municipal Corporation
Abdul Quddhoose
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
