K.Matheswaran v. The Collector
Case brief
What is this about?
The Court dismissed the writ petition and connected miscellaneous petitions because the petitioner withdrew them with the endorsement of counsel.
What did the court decide?
Writ petition and connected miscellaneous petitions dismissed as withdrawn.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.12.2018
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
W.P. No. 30793 of 2018
and
W.M.P.Nos.35931 to 35933 of 2018
- K.Matheswaran
2. K.Mailsamy ... Petitioners
Vs.
1. The Collector,
Office of the Salem Collector,
Salem.
2. The Land acquisition Officer cum
District Revenue Officer,
Office of the Land Acquisition officer cum,
District Revenue Officer, Salem.
3. The Superintending Engineer,
Highways C & M, Salem. ... Respondents
PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari
calling for the records of the second respondent in impugned
notification in Na.Ka.No.29598/2016/B3, dated 24.11.2017 issued
under Section 15(2) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001.
For Petitioners : Mr.M.Rajasekhar
For Respondents : Mr.C.Thirumaran, Special Government Pleader O R D E R
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
K. Matheswaran
- petitioner
K. Mailsamy
- respondent
The Collector, Office of the Salem Collector, Salem
- respondent
The Land Acquisition Officer cum District Revenue Officer, Office of the Land Acquisition Officer cum, District Revenue Officer, Salem
- respondent
The Superintending Engineer, Highways C & M, Salem
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court