Writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking quashing of an impugned notice was disposed of as infructuous and closed without expressing an opinion on merits due to the petitioner's stated position.
Writ petition disposed of as closed and infructuous.
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.
W.P.[MD]No.11624 of 2011
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 29.11.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
W.P.[MD]No.11624 of 2011 and M.P.[MD]No.1 of 2011
M.A.Hameed Kannu
... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Tahsildar, Vilavancode Taluk Office, Vilavancode,
Kanyakumari District.
2.M.Noorul Ameen
... Respondents
P RAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned notice issued by the first respondent in his proceedings No.Aa4/25200/11 dated 28.09.2011 and quash the same as illegal.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Karthik Raja for M/s.M.Ajmal Khan For Respondent No.1 : Mr.A.Baskaran
Additional Government Pleader For Respondent No.2 : Mr.L.Jeen Felix
for S.C.Herold Singh
O R D E R
***************
Mr.V.Karthik Raja, learned Counsel representing the Counsel on record for writ petitioner, Mr.A.Baskaran, learned Additional Government Pleader for the first respondent [official respondents] and Mr.L.Jeen Felix, learned Counsel on behalf of second respondent [private respondent] are before me.
2. Learned Counsel representing the Counsel on record for writ petitioner submits that the captioned main writ petition has become infructuous.
3. Recording the stated position of the writ petitioner, captioned writ petition is disposed of as closed the same having https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ become infructuous. Though obvious it is made clear no opinion or
1/2
W.P.[MD]No.11624 of 2011
view has been expressed on the merits of the matter. Consequently, captioned Miscellaneous Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (AD-II)
// True Copy //
/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)
MR
NOTE: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To
The Tahsildar, Vilavancode Taluk Office, Vilavancode, Kanyakumari District.
+1 CC to M/s.AJMAL ASSOCIATES, Advocate ( SR-36575[F] dated 30/11/2021 )
+1 CC to M/s.S.C. HEROLD SINGH, Advocate ( SR-36659[F] dated 01/12/2021 )
+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-36519[F] dated 30/11/2021 )
ORDER MADE IN W.P.[MD]No.11624 of 2011 29.11.2021
SMV (CO) GC(07.12.2021) 2P 5C
2/2
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M.A.Hameed Kannu
The Tahsildar, Vilavancode Taluk Office, Vilavancode, Kanyakumari District
M.Noorul Ameen
M.Sundar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
