Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

R.Rangasamy, Vs the Assistant Engineer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2020)

Home
Madras HC
2020
R.Rangasamy, Vs the Assistant EngineerR.Rangasamy, v. the Assistant Engineer

Dismissed

R.Rangasamy, v. the Assistant Engineer

Madras HC4 Aug 2020WP/11868/2013

Case brief

from the order text

What is this about?

COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:…

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

A

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 04.08.2020

CORAM :

The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

W.P.No.11868 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013

R.Rangasamy ... Petitioner

Vs.

The Assistant Engineer, New Zone – X, Ward No.136, (Old Zone VIII, Ward 126), Corporation of Chennai, South Bough Road, T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. ... Respondent

Prayer:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondent and his subordinates in any manner evicting or disturbing the public call office (PCO phone booth shop) run by the petitioner at No.3/42, Giriyappa Road, Mangali Nilam, T.Nagar, Chennai – 17 near Nagesh Theatre, Thiyagaraya Road, except by due process of law.

For Petitioner : no appearance For Respondent : Mr.P.Gopinath,

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
R.Rangasamy
respondent
The Assistant Engineer, New Zone – X, Ward No.136, Corporation of Chennai

Coram

AI extract

M. Duraiswamy

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 4 Aug 2020 · August
Registered: 22 Apr 2013
Case no.: WP/11868/2013

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from M.duraiswamy

Ganapathy Vs State
3 Aug 2020
J.Vijayakumar Vs the District Registrar
3 Aug 2020
V.Jeevan Vs the Sub Registrar
3 Aug 2020
P.Senthilkumar Vs the Commissioner
4 Aug 2020
K.Sridharan Vs the Junior Engineer

Cite this judgement

R.Rangasamy, v. the Assistant Engineer, WP/11868/2013 (MAD), decided on 4 August 2020.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Bench / Coram

M. Duraiswamy

Parties & counsel

Dismissed

A compact analysis

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.

Standing Counsel – Corporation of Chennai

O R D E R

Consistently, there is no representation for the petitioner. Even when the matter was listed on 05.11.2013, there was no representation for the petitioner, hence, the Writ Petition was adjourned by two weeks. Thereafter, when the matter was listed on 16.07.2020, the learned counsel for the petitioner was not present to make his submission, hence, the matter was adjourned to 30.07.2020. On 30.07.2020 also, the learned counsel for the petitioner was not present and hence, the Registry was directed to list the matter under the caption “for dismissal” on 04.08.2020 (i.e.) today. Though the matter has been listed under

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

the caption “for dismissal”, today also, the learned counsel for the petitioner is not present and hence, this Court has no other option, except to dismiss the Writ Petition for non-prosecution.

2.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that on inspection by the Officers of the respondent – Corporation, they did not find any Public Call Office as averred in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition.

3.The submission made by the learned standing counsel for the respondent is recorded.

4.Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed for nonprosecution. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
va
To
The Assistant Engineer,
New Zone – X, Ward No.136,
(Old Zone VIII, Ward 126),
Corporation of Chennai,
South Bough Road,
T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017.
W.P.No.11868 of 2013
and M.P.No.1 of 2013
MR(CO)
GS(03/09/2020)

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

CNR

HCMA010044482013

Topic

Writ and Judicial Review

Bench

Disposal

DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION

4 Aug 2020

A.Suresh Vs the Collector

4 Aug 2020