Dismissed

M/S.Holy Cross College v. the Registrar

Madras HC15 Jun 2017WP(MD)/9634/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court held the writ petition infructuous to dismiss as the respondent had already withdrawn the incorrect remarks about the petitioner college's recognition status from the official website, fulfilling the court's earlier injunction.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's prayer to remove false information was already executed by the respondent; petition dismissed as infructuous.

M/S.Holy Cross College Vs the Registrar — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 15.06.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.9634 of 2014 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2014

¶7

M/s.Holy Cross College of Education, rep. by its Secretary, Teppakulam Post, Trichirappalli-2 ... Petitioner

¶8

-Vs-

¶9

The Registrar, Tamilnadu Teachers Education University, Lady Willington College Campus, Kamarajar Salai, Chennai-600 005. ... Respondent

¶10

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 remove/delete the false and incorrect information displayed in the official web-site of the respondent about the petitioner college as if its recognition has been withdrawn by the NCTE for the academic year 2013-2014 forthwith.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Saravanan For Respondent : Mr.U.Venkatesan

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

The prayer sought for in this writ petition is to direct the respondent to remove/delete the false and incorrect information displayed in the official web-site of the respondent about the petitioner college, as if its recognition has been withdrawn by the NCTE for the academic year 2013-2014 forthwith.

¶14

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

¶15

3.The respondent has filed a counter stating that in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ compliance of the order passed by this court in the injunction petition in M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2014, dated 23.06.2014, the respondent

¶16

¶17

University has withdrawn the remarks displayed against the name of the petitioner college.

¶18

4.The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that since the request of the petitioner has been executed, the writ petition has become infructuous.

¶19

5.Recording the above submission and taking into consideration the counter filed by the respondent, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Assistant Registrar (CO)

¶22

/True Copy/

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶24

1 CC TO Mr.U.VENKATESAN, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 60410

¶25

1 CC TO Mr.B.SARAVANAN, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 60519

¶26

¶27

TE/MR-KKR/SAR-II : 13/07/2017 : 2P/3C

¶28

W.P.(MD)No.9634 of 2014 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2014 15.06.2017

¶29

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

M/S.Holy Cross College v. the Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Holy Cross College v. the Registrar

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

N.Kannan Vs the Government of Tamil Nadu

M/S.Visvas Builders, Vs the Government of Tamil Nadu

S.Muhammed Sharif, Vs the Assistant Commissioner

P. Balamurugan Vs the Superintendent of Police

Kalloorani Kshathriya Vs the District Educational

S.Saravanakumar, Vs the District Revenue Officer