Dismissed

G.Gnanasehar, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC19 Sept 2018WA(MD)/1399/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ appeal and miscellaneous petition, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court refused to interfere with the Single Judge's order directing the appellant to file an appeal. The writ appeal was consequently dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal and miscellaneous petition were dismissed; the appellant was given six weeks to file the appeal under Section 15 of Letters Patent.

G.Gnanasehar, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 19.09.2018

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

¶6

W.A.(MD) No.1399 of 2014 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2014

¶7

G.Gnanasekar ... Appellant vs.

¶8

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, rep.by the Secretary, Micro Small and Medium Enterprises, St.George Fort, Chennai.

¶9

2.The Industries Commissioner and Director, Industries and Commerce, Mandavelipakkam, Chennai. ... Respondents

¶10

Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 17.10.2014 passed in W.P(MD)No.16965 of 2014 by this Court.

¶11

Prayer in WP(MD). 16965/ 2014 :

¶12

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a WRIT OF CERTIORARI or any other appropriate writ or order or direction in the nature of writ calling for the records relating to the order passed by the 2nd respondent in his proceedings in R.C.No.15809/EG2/2014-3 dated 19.9.14 and quash the same as illegal.

¶13

For Appellant : Mr.A.Velan for M/s.Ajmal Associates For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Baskarapandian Special Government Pleader

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

[Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.]

¶16

We are not inclined to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge has merely directed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the appellant to file an appeal. Thus, this writ appeal stands dismissed. The appellant is given a further period of six weeks from

¶17

¶18

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment to file an appeal, which will not be decided taking note of the delay occurred in the meanwhile. No costs. Consequently, MP(MD)No.1 of 2014 is closed. Sd/

¶19

Assistant Registrar(AS)

¶20

/True copy/

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-III)

¶22

¶23

1.The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Micro Small and Medium Enterprises, St.George Fort, Chennai.

¶24

2.The Industries Commissioner and Director, Industries and Commerce, Mandavelipakkam, Chennai.

¶25

+1cc to M/s.AJMAL ASSOCIATES, Advocate, SR.No.85707 +1cc to M/s.Special Government Pleader,SR.No. 85888

¶26

W.A.(MD) No.1399 of 2014 19.09.2018

¶27

¶28

KK/SV/SAR-3/15.10.2018/2P-5C

¶29

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

G.Gnanasehar, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Gnanasehar, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B.Veeralakshmi Vs R.Nageswaran

The Secretary to Government Vs P.Ilayaraja

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs v. Balaganesan

Johnrose Vs the Inspector of Police

Ondimuthu @ N.O. Muthu Vs Arulmigu Meenakshi

K.Muthupandi Vs the Secretary to Government