K.Kani v. the Commisioner
Case brief
What is this about?
The writ petition filed under Article 226 to quash an auction-cum-tender notification and conduct an auction was dismissed as infructuous.
What did the court decide?
None. The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous.
What the court decided
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.03.2017 CORAM: THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN W.P.(MD) No.955 of 2014 and WMP.(MD).No.1 & 2 of 2014
K.Kani
Vs.
The Commissioner, Sattur Municipality, Sattur, Virudhunagar District.
... Respondent
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records relating to the auction-cum-tender notification issued by the respondent dated 08.01.2014 in Na.Ka.2141/2013/M1 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent herein to conduct auction alone after following all the procedures contemplated under law.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.K.Senthil
For Respondent : Mr.R.Karthiheyan A.G.P.,
O R D E R
It is represented by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the prayer sought for in this writ petition has become infructuous.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
K.Kani
- respondent
The Commissioner, Sattur Municipality
Coram
V.Parthiban
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court