Disposed

G.R.Shekar v. The Government of India

Madras HC2 Aug 2021WP/15946/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court order grants limited relief directing respondents 2 and 3 to complete pending enquiry proceedings within twelve weeks. Notice to the contesting 4th respondent is dispensed with but ensuring hearing parties is directed. The writ petition is disposed of with no costs.

What did the court decide?

Direct respondents 2 and 3 to complete pending enquiry proceedings within twelve weeks; notice to other respondents dispensed but hearing directed.

G.R.Shekar Vs The Government of India — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 02.08.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶5

WP.No.15946/2021

¶6

[Video Conferencing]

¶7

1.G.R.Shekar 2.Mrs.P.Ramani .. Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

1.The Government of India The Under Secretary to Government Ministry of Culture, CSL Shastri Bhawan New Delhi.

¶10

2.The District Collector No.62, Rajaji Salai Chennai 600 001.

¶11

3.The Tahsildar Mylapore Triplicane RA Puram, Nandanam Chennai 600 028.

¶12

4.The Director Kalakshetra Foundation Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai 600 041. .. Respondents

¶13

Prayer : - Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus directing the 2^nd and 3^rd respondent to complete the enquiry proceedings in Na.Ka.J2/17134/2012 daetd 04.06.2018 for issuance of patta and pass orders within the time frame stipulated by this Court.

¶14

For Petitioners : Mr.K.M.Vijayan For R1 : Mr.S.Muthusamy Senior Central Govt.Counsel For RR2 to 4 : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan Government Advocate

¶15

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

¶16

ORDER

¶17

(1) Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3.

¶18

(2) The limited scope of the writ petition is for a direction to the respondents 2 and 3 to conduct the enquiry proceedings which is now pending from 04.06.2018, in Na.Ka.No.J2/17134/2012. The 4^th respondent/Director, Kalakshetra Foundation is the contesting respondent.

¶19

(3) At any rate, since a limited relief alone is granted directing the respondents 2 and 3 to complete the enquiry within a period of twelve weeks, notice to the 4^th respondent is dispensed with.

¶20

(4) However, the respondents 2 and 3 may ensure that necessary notice is issued to the 4^th respondent during the enquiry proceedings, hear the writ petitioner and also the 4^th respondent and thereafter pass orders as stated, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶21

(5) The writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶22

Sd/Assistant Registrar(IX)

¶23

//True Copy//

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

AP To 1.The Under Secretary to Government Government of India Ministry of Culture, CSL Shastri Bhawan New Delhi.

¶26

2.The District Collector No.62, Rajaji Salai Chennai 600 001.

¶27

3.The Tahsildar Mylapore Triplicane RA Puram, Nandanam Chennai 600 028.

¶28

4.The Director Kalakshetra Foundation Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai 600 041.

¶29

+1cc to M/s.K.M.Vijayan, Advocate SR.No. 37168 +1 cc to Government Pleader Sr.No. 37698

¶30

WP.No.15946/2021

¶31

NRL(CO) B.VC(23.08.2021)

¶32

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

G.R.Shekar v. The Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.R.Shekar v. The Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kandayammal Vs v.P.Sekar

V.Vanitha Vs Rajamani Ammal

Manicka Selvi Vs E.M.Pr.Muthappan

A.Xavier, Vs The District Collector

K.R.Balasubramanian Vs The Joint Sub Registrar No.1

K.Narasimha Naidu, Vs The Collector