This is a miscellaneous order dismissing a writ petition as non-prosecution. The petitioner failed to appear or provide representation on two consecutive dates, leading the court to infer disinterest and dismiss the matter.
No costs. Writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution.
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: 10.01.2020
C O R A M
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P.No.15994 of 2017
O.Manickam ... Petitioner
Vs. 1.State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Secretary, Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 2.The Corporation of Salem City, Rep. by its Commissioner, Salem – 636 001. 3.The Assistant Commissioner, Corporation/Kondalampatti Regional Office, Dadagapatti, Salem – 636 006. 4.The Chief Educational Officer, Collectorate, Salem District. 5.The Headmistress, Corporation Middle School, Dadagapatty, Salem – 636 006. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus (a) directing the respondents 2 and 3 to ensure that the class room in the middle school, Dadagapatty, Salem, given to the Aadhaar Officials as temporary arrangements is vacated to conduct classes to the students and (b) directing the respondents 2 and 3 to take proper steps to remove the toilets built adjacent to the kitchen in the middle school, Dadagapatty, Sanjeevarayanpettai, Salem and construct in the earlier place in the school premises at the earliest time.
For Petitioner : No appearance
For Respondents 1 to 4 : Mr.K.Ravikumar,
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The matter is listed under the caption “for dismissal” today. There is no representation on the side of the petitioner. Even on the last occasion i.e., on 06.01.2020, there was no representation on the side of the petitioner. It can now be inferred that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting this petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
nl
To
1.State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by Secretary,
Education Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Corporation of Salem City,
Rep. by its Commissioner,
Salem – 636 001.
3.The Assistant Commissioner,
Corporation/Kondalampatti Regional Office,
Dadagapatti,
Salem – 636 006.
4.The Chief Educational Officer,
Collectorate,
Salem District.
+1 cc to Government Pleader Sr.No. 3512,3194
W.P.No.15994 of 2017
A.SK(04/03/2020)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is interested in prosecuting the writ petition.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
O.Manickam
State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Secretary, Education Department
Corporation of Salem City, Rep. by its Commissioner
Assistant Commissioner, Corporation/Kondalampatti Regional Office
Chief Educational Officer
Headmistress, Corporation Middle School
Abdul Qddhoose
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
