The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as infructuous after the petitioner's counsel represented that the prayer sought had become infructuous.
None. The petition was dismissed as 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.No.14297 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21.06.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.No.14297 of 2015
P.Subramanian
... Petitioners
Vs.
... Respondents
PRAYER: This Writ Petition filed under Section 226 of Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 2nd respondent in his proceedings No.Na. Ka. No. J7/5872/2014 dt 19.12.2014 quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to grant approval for the petitioners plot situated in Survey No.88/1A in Sriram Nagar, Alagapuram, Periapudur Village, Salem District.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.S.Karthik Raja For Respondents : Mr.K.Bhuvaneswari for Salem Corporation
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
1/2
W.P.No.14297 of 2015
Sk
Order
When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is represented by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the prayer sought for in the Writ Petition become infructuous and he also made endorsement to that effect in the bundle.
No costs.
21.06.2022
sk
To
W.P.No.14297 of 2015
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition is maintainable when the prayer sought becomes infructuous.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
P.Subramanian
The Commissioner, Salem Corporation, Salem
Assistant Commissioner, Hastampatti Ward office, Salem Municipality
M.DHANDAPANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
