Aasaithambi, S/O Rathinam v. the Chief Educational Office
Case brief
What is this about?
In a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court closed the petition as the cause for its filing had vanished, without costs.
What did the court decide?
Writ petition closed with no costs.
What the court decided
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.07.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P(MD)No.10580 of 2014 and
M.P(MD)No.1 of 2014
Aasaithambi ... Petitioner Vs
1.The Chief Educational Officer, Theni District, Theni.
2.The District Educational Officer, Uthamapalayam, Theni District.
3.Archuna Perumal, Secretary, 47/1988, Kamatchipuram Hindu Nadar Uravin Murai Sangam, 206, Higher Secondary School Street, Kamatchipuram-625 520. Uthamapalayam, Theni District.
4.Kamatchipuram Hindu Nadar Uravinmurai, (Registration No.47 of 1988), Ward No.4, Kamatchipuram Post, Chinnamanoor Viz., Uthamapalayam Taluk, Theni District-625 520, Represented by its President, R.Selvaraj, Son of Rathinasamy Nadar, Ward No.4, Kamatchipuram Post, Chinnamanoor viz., Uthamapalayam Taluk, Theni District-625 520. 5.R.Selvaraj, Son of Rathinasamy Nadar, President, Kamatchipuram Hindu Nadar Uravinmurai, (Registration No.47 of 1988), Ward No.4, Kamatchipuram Post, Chinnamanoor viz., https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Uthamapalayam Taluk, Theni District-625 520.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Aasaithambi
- respondent
The Chief Educational Officer, Theni District, Theni
- respondent
The District Educational Officer, Uthamapalayam, Theni District
- respondent
Archuna Perumal
- respondent
Kamatchipuram Hindu Nadar Uravinmurai
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court