Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking direction to dispose of a representation and receive a payment. The Court allowed the withdrawal of the petition by the Counsel and dismissed it.
Withdrawal of the writ petition allowed; Writ Petition dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :26.06.2019
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
W.P. No. 310 of 2018
Ulaganathan
... Petitioner
-vs-
The Tahsildar, Vanoor Taluk, Villupuram District. ... Respondents
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent to dispose the Petitioner's representation dated on 06.11.2017 and to direct to receive the payment sum of Rs.1,48,000/- Rupees One Lakhs Forty Eight Thousand Two Hundred Only) as per the memo of the Respondent dated 31.10.2006 in the Respondent proceedings Na. Ka. A2/7258/200.
For Petitioner : Mr. G. Ranganathan For Respondent : Mr. M. Karthikeyan, Learned Additional Government Pleader
O R D E R
Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect, which is recorded.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(Co)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
vjt
To
The Tahsildar, Vanoor Taluk, Villupuram District.
+1cc to Mr.G. Ranganathan , Advocate SR.No. 53288
W.P. No. 310 of 2018
A.SK(01/08/2019)
Ulaganathan
The Tahsildar, Vanoor Taluk, Villupuram District
P.D. Audikeshavalu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
