Dismissed

Krishnakumar v. the Member Secretary/

Madras HC7 Mar 2017WP(MD)/3914/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition under Article 226 filed by Krishnakumar. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent to issue a Hindu Scheduled Tribe community certificate to his son. The court noted that while an enquiry was pending on the file and the relief could not be granted, the petition was dismissed without costs.

What did the court decide?

No relief was granted as the petition was dismissed.

Krishnakumar Vs the Member Secretary/ — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 07.03.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM

¶6

and

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.AUTHINATHAN

¶8

W.P(MD)No.3914 of 2017

Krishnakumar

.. Petitioner

Vs.

The Member Secretary/ the District Vigilance Committee, Office of the District Aathi Dravidar and Tribes Welfare Office, Dindigul District.

¶13

.. Respondent

¶14

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to issue the Hindu, Scheduled Tribe community certificate to the petitioner's son by name Maheswarn, by considering the community certificate issued to the petitioner in accordance with law within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Alagumani

¶16

For Respondent : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan, Special Government Pleader.

¶17

ORDER

¶18

[Order of the Court was made by A.SELVAM, J. ]

¶19

This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the respondent to issue community certificate of the petitioner's son as Hindu Scheduled Tribe, by way of issuing a writ of mandamus.

¶20

2.Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan, learned Special Government

¶21

Pleader, has taken notice for the respondent.

¶22

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended to the effect that already an enquiry is pending on the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ file of the respondent.

¶23

¶24

4.Considering the representation made on the side of the petitioner, the relief sought in the writ petition cannot be granted and therefore the same deserves to be dismissed.

¶25

5.In fine, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar(CS-II)

¶28

/True Copy/

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶30

¶31

The Member Secretary/ the District Vigilance Committee, Office of the District Aathi Dravidar and Tribes Welfare Office, Dindigul District.

¶32

+1cc to Mr.R.ALAGUMANI, Advocate, SR.No:13557

¶33

+1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No:12881

¶34

smn

¶35

AE/RR/15.03.2017/2P/4C

¶36

ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.3914 of 2017 07.03.2017

¶37

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

Krishnakumar v. the Member Secretary/

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishnakumar v. the Member Secretary/

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

Johnsi Rani Vs the Superintendent of Police

P.Petchiammal Vs the Election Commissioner

S.Devadhas, Vs the District Collector

M.Rajendran, Vs the Superintendent of Police

S.Vadivelu Vs the Superintendent of Police

A.Thilagam Vs the Chairman / the District