S.Mohan v. the Director
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by S.Mohan seeking promotion and retirement benefits due to the petitioner's non-appearance, treating the case as non-prosferred.
What did the court decide?
The writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 27.04.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
Writ Petition No.24025 of 2009
S.Mohan .. Petitioner
Versus The Director, Local Fund Audit Department, Kuralagam 4th Floor, Chennai 600 108. .. Respondent
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the respondent in proceedings Na.Ka.No.pa & NI-II(5) 26641/2009-2 dated 18.08.2009 and quash the same and to direct the respondent to give promotion to the petitioner to the post of Assistance Inspector with effect from 31.03.2009 forenoon based on G.O. Ms. No.130 dated 31.03.2009 of Finance (Local Fund) Department and give consequential retirement benefits.
For Petitioner : No appearance
For Respondent : Mr.K.Ravikumar,
Additional Government Pleader
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
S.Mohan
- respondent
The Director, Local Fund Audit Department
Coram
M.RAJA
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court