Dismissed

Fathima, v. Government of Puducherry

Madras HC13 Dec 2021WP/27536/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking a writ of Mandamus for action against certain individuals was listed for hearing. The petitioners failed to appear on two consecutive dates (07.12.2021 and 13.12.2021). The Court held that their absence demonstrated lack of interest and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.

Fathima, Vs Government of Puducherry — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 13.12.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶5

W.P.No.27536 of 2014

¶6

Mrs.Fathima 2. Mrs.Mary Theresa 3. Mrs.Elizabeth Lizi 4. Mr.Mohamed Ali ... Petitioners Vs

¶7

The District Collector, Collectorate, Rajaji Salai, Chennai District.

¶8

The Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Inspector General of Registration, Santhome, Chennai 600 028. 3. The Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Branch, Land Grabbing Cell, Chennai District, Vepery, Chennai 600 007.

¶9

The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Ripon Buildings, Chennai 600 003. 5. The Tahsildar, Tondiarpet Taluk, Tondiarpet, Chennai 600 081.

¶10

The District Registrar(Administration) North Chennai District, Rajaji Salai, Chennai 600 001.

¶11

The Inspector of Police, N1 Police Station, Royapuram, Chennai 600 013.

¶12

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

¶13

The Sub Registrar, Royapuram S.R.O. Rajaji Salai, Chennai 600 001.

¶14

Abitha Begum

¶15

Mr.Afsar

¶16

Mr.Rafi

¶17

Mr.Aasif

¶18

Mrs.Parzana

¶19

Mr.Jamil Basha

¶20

Mr.Thurab

¶21

Mrs.Asifa Sulthana

¶22

...Respondents

¶23

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 8 to consider the petitioners representation dated 19.5.2014 and take appropriate action against respondents 9 to 16 within the time fixed by this Honourable court.

¶24

For Petitioners : No appearance

¶25

For Respondents : Mr.M.Rajendiran

¶26

Additional Government Pleader

¶27

[For R1, R3, R5 and R7]

¶28

Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja Government Advocate

¶29

[For R2, R6 and R8]

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

W hen the matter was listed for hearing on 07.12.2021, none appeared on behalf of the petitioners. Thus, this Court passed an order, directing the Registry to list the matter on 09.12.2021 under the caption “For Dismissal”.

¶32

2. Even today, i.e., on 13.12.2021, when the matter is taken up for hearing, none appeared for the petitioners. Thus, it is evident that the petitioners are not interested in pursuing the matter.

¶33

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

¶34

3. Accordingly, the Writ Petition in W.P.No.27536 of 2014 stands dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.

¶35

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS IX)

¶36

//True Copy//

¶37

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶38

nti/kak

¶39

¶40

The District Collector, Collectorate, Rajaji Salai,

¶41

Chennai District.

¶42

The Inspector General of Registration, Office of the Inspector General of Registration, Santhome, Chennai 600 028.

¶43

The Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Branch, Land Grabbing Cell, Chennai District,

¶44

Vepery, Chennai 600 007.

¶45

The Commissioner,

¶46

Corporation of Chennai, Ripon Buildings, Chennai 600 003.

¶47

The Tahsildar, Tondiarpet Taluk, Tondiarpet, Chennai 600 081.

¶48

The District Registrar(Administration) North Chennai District, Rajaji Salai, Chennai 600 001.

¶49

The Inspector of Police,

¶50

N1 Police Station,Royapuram, Chennai 600 013.

¶51

The Sub Registrar, Royapuram S.R.O. Rajaji Salai, Chennai 600 001.

¶52

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.67048 and 66583

¶53

W.P.No. 27536 of 2014

¶54

PL(CO) CT 29/12/2021

¶55

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

Fathima, v. Government of Puducherry

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fathima, v. Government of Puducherry

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.a.Sivalingam Vs The Joint Commissioner

Mr. Jacob Mathew Vs the State of Tamilnadu Rep.

R.Priyanga Vs the Branch Manager

Mr.Karthik Sabanayagam Vs The Union of India

Tmt.v.Mohanammal, Vs The Tamilnadu Electricity

Muththammal Vs The Secretary