Petitioners challenged the cancellation of a legal certificate. The court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous because the certificate had already been cancelled, rendering the prayer devoid of substance.
Writ petition dismissed as infructuous as the certified order was already cancelled.
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: 17.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
W.P.No.14558 of 2010 and M.P.No.1 of 2010
Vs.
Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of certiori, to call for the records of the first respondent bearing V06/25743/09 dated 12.05.2010 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.L.Dhamodaran For R1 & R2 : Mr.V.Ravi, Special G.P For R3 : Mr.R.Anand Kumar
This Writ Petition has been filed to call for the records of the first respondent and quash the same.
Nungambakkam has already been cancelled and therefore, the relief sought for in the Writ Petition has become infructuous.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CCC)
// True Copy //
Sub Assistant Registrar
mfa
To
+1cc to the Government Pleader, SR.No.18797
W.P.No.14558 of 2010
and M.P.No.1 of 2010
NRL(CO) CB(05/04/2022)
Kumarasamy
Vetrivelan
The District Collector
The Tahsildar
Rupavathy
P. Velmurugan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
