Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 for a house tax receipt. Lacking any representation from the petitioner on two successive dates, the court dismissed the petition for non-prosecution.
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.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED 12.04.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN
W.P(MD)No.5649 of 2016
Pandi
..Petitioner
Vs
1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.
2.The Block Development Officer/Special Officer, Block Development Office, Collectorate, Madurai. ..Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to issue house tax receipt to the Petitioner in respect of Door Number/1/356, by considering the Petitioner's representation dated 5.10.2016 within the time frame fixed by this Court.
ORDER
When the matter was taken up for hearing on 11.04.2017, there was no representation for the Petitioner and hence, the matter was directed to be listed under the caption''for dismissal''today. Even today also there is no representation for the Petitioner.
2.In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non prosecution. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (CS-III)
/True copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
2
To
1.The District Collector, Madurai District,
Madurai.
VSN
PSM/RR/25.04.2017/2P/3C
W.P(MD)No.5649 of 2017 12.04.2017
Pandi
District Collector, Madurai District
Block Development Officer, Madurai
V. Parthiban
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
