Petitioner sought recall of an order directing the Corporation to trace records without a time limit. Court dismissed sub-application as replacement order for time limit unnecessary given steps taken to trace records.
Sub application stands dismissed.
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: 02.02.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
SUB A(MD)No.16 of 2018 in CONT.P.(MD)No.775 of 2017 in W.P.(MD)No.20796 of 2016
A.Syed Abdul Rahim ... Petitioner/Petitioner/ Petitioner -Vs-
Sandeep Nandhuri, I.A.S., Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai. ... Respondent/2nd Respondent/ 2nd Respondent
Prayer: Petition filed under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, praying to reopen the Contempt Petition No.775 of 2017 dated 07.07.2017.
Prayer in Cont.P(MD)No.775/2017:-
To punish the Contemnor/2nd respondent, for his wilful disobedicne and wilful non compliance of this Honourable Court's order dated 21.12.2016 made in WP(MD)No.20796 of 2016.
Prayer in WP(MD). 20796/ 2016 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records, relating with the order of the 1st respondent made in S.A. No.14857/D/2015, dt. 29.06.2016 and quash the same as it is arbitrary and illegal and in consequence to direct her to take appropriate action against the respondents 2 and 3, under Section 19 and 20 of RTI Act on the petitioner s complaint dt. 29.10.2015.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Suriyanarayanan
ORDER
This Petition has been filed to recall the order passed by this Court. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
2
2.According to the petitioner, earlier this Court disposed of the contempt petition, directing the respondent to trace out the records and as soon as the records are traced, the copies of the same should be furnished to the petitioner.
3.The present petition has been filed seeking relief to fix time limit to trace out the records, since at the time of passing order in the contempt petition no time limit has been fixed by this Court. Hence, he wants to fix a time limit.
4.This Court, after hearing of both parties and considering the material fact that the record is not traceable by the corporation, directs the corporation to trace out the bundle as expeditiously as possible and serve copy of the same to the petitioner.
5.In the above circumstances, since the order has been considered by the corporation and taking steps to trace out the entire records, there is no necessity to recall the order. Hence, the Sub Application stands dismissed.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(P&A)
/True Copy/
Sub-Assistant Registrar
To
Mr.Sandeep Nandhuri, I.A.S., Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai.
Ta
RL/2C/2P/CVC/SAR1/26/2/2018
SUB.A.(MD)No.16 of 2018
02.02.2018
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the defendant application to recall an order directing proper trace out of records which are not traceable by the corporation should be dismissed.
Syed Abdul Rahim
Sandeep Nandhuri, I.A.S., Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai
V.Bharathidasan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
