Dismissed

Senthilnathan C v. the Managing Director

Madras HC21 Jan 2022WP(MD)/879/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner in a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India sought to withdraw the petition and two miscellaneous applications. The court acceded to the request, dismissed the matters as withdrawn, and directed there be no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of the writ petition and miscellaneous applications allowed; no order as to costs.

Senthilnathan C Vs the Managing Director — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.879 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 21.01.2022 CORAM

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.SUNDAR W.P(MD)No.879 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.714 & 715 of 2022

C.Senthilnathan

... Petitioner

-Vs-

1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation, (TASMAC) CMDA Complex, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

¶8

2.The Regional Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC)

¶9

Anna Nagar, Madurai 625 020.

¶10

3.The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC) Sivagangai District. ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from awarding contract or issuing license to any person who does not possess valid NO Objection Certificate from the owner of the bar premises attached to TASMAC Retail Shop No.7511 in Sivagangai District, consequently directing the respondents to extent the license period for fifteen months.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Malaikani

¶13

For Respondents : Mr.H.Arumugam, Standing Counsel for TASMAC

¶14

Mr.S.Malaikani, learned counsel on record for the writ petitioner submits that he has instructions from the writ petitioner to withdraw the captioned writ petition and the captioned WMPs thereat.

¶15

Learned counsel on record for the writ petitioner requests for leave to withdraw the captioned matter. Request acceded to. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

1/2

¶17

W.P(MD)No.879 of 2022

¶18

Captioned main writ petition and captioned WMPs thereat are dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/-

¶19

Assistant Registrar (CS-II)

¶20

// True Copy //

¶21

/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶22

vsm

¶23

Note :

¶24

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.

¶25

To 1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation, (TASMAC) CMDA Complex, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. 2.The Regional Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC) Anna Nagar, Madurai 625 020. 3.The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC) Sivagangai District.

¶26

+1 CC to M/s.H.ARUMUGAM, Advocate ( SR-2330[F] dated 25/01/2022 )

¶27

W.P(MD)No.879	of 2022
and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.714 & 715	of 2022
21.	01.2022

¶28

RK(01/02/2022) 2P 5C

¶29

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

¶30

2/2

Senthilnathan C v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Senthilnathan C v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

H.Hameem Mustafa Vs the Tamil Nadu Waqf Board

Thilagachandran Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Dinakaran.D Vs the District Collector

S.Nambirajan, Trustee, Vs the Joint Commissioner

A.Suresh Kumar Vs the Joint Commissioner

Jakkammal Vs the Regional Transport Authority