Dismissed

N.Loganathan v. The Corporation of Chennai

Madras HC23 Jan 2017WP/38068/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court referred to prior directions mandating that the Implementation Committee's order be placed before the Commissioner for a final call on licence cancellation. The Court directed the decision be taken within three months after notifying both parties and disposed of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The direction to place the order before the Commissioner was noted; the writ petition stood disposed of with no costs.

N.Loganathan Vs The Corporation of Chennai — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 23.01.2017

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

The Hon'ble MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

AND

¶6

The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR

¶7

W.P.No.38068 of 2015

¶8

and

¶9

M.P.No.1 of 2015
N.Loganathan ... Petitioner
-Vs-
1. The Corporation of Chennai,
rep. by its Commissioner,
Ripon Buildings, Poonamallee High Road,
Chennai 600 003.
2. The Chairman,
Hawking Zone Implementation Committee,
7/6, R.A. Puram, III Cross Street,
Chennai 600 028.
3. The Zonal Officer,
Zone X, Corporation of Chennai,
117, N.S.K. Salai, Kodambakkam,
Chennai 600 024.
4. P.Naveen ... Respondents

¶10

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the 2^nd respondent in proceedings dated 14.07.2015 in H.Z.I.C.C.No. 090/2015 and the subsequent proceedings dated 02.11.2015 vide proceedings in H.Z.I.C.C.No.154/2015 and to quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ravishankar Rao for Mr.C.S.Kiran For Respondents : Mr.V.C.Selvasekaran for RR 1 & 3 : Mr.Master Ganesh Ramachandran for R-2 : Mr.M.Balasubramanian for R-4

¶11

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

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

(Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶14

On hearing the learned counsel for parties, we are of the view that in terms of the directions passed in K.Parvathy vs. Corporation of Chennai, (W.P.No.20001 of 2014) on 04.09.2014, the order of the Implementation Committee could be placed before the Commissioner to take a final call on the issue of cancellation of licence/claim of allotment, more so, as the premises are stated to be lying locked at present, though the petitioner claims that his goods are inside the shop. The decision by the Commissioner will be taken after notice to both the concerned parties being the petitioner and the fourth respondent, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of the order.

¶15

Writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2015 stands closed.

¶16

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS V) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar sra To 1. The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Ripon Buildings, Poonamallee High Road, Chennai 600 003. 2. The Chairman, Hawking Zone Implementation Committee, 7/6, R.A. Puram, III Cross Street, Chennai 600 028. 3. The Zonal Officer, Zone X, Corporation of Chennai, 117, N.S.K. Salai, Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024. +1cc to Mr.C.S.Kiran, Advocate, S.R.No.4832 +1cc to Mr.M.Balasubramanian, Advocate, S.R.No.4429 W.P.No.38068 of 2015 TM(CO) CA(02/02/2017)

¶17

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

N.Loganathan v. The Corporation of Chennai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Loganathan v. The Corporation of Chennai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Elephant G.Rajendran Vs The Chief Secretary

A.Vetriselvan Vs Mr.a.Gnanasekaran

Mrs.Meena Shivakumar, Vs The Member Secretary

P.Chelliah Vs The Commissioner

K.G.Sundaram, Vs The District Collector

J.Manoharan Vaiz Vs The Secretary to Government