Dismissed

S.Antony v. the Secy.to Govt. State of T.N

Madras HC12 Jul 2023WP/27675/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari and mandamus to call for records and direct the discontinuation of quarrying operations in areas near residential zones. The court dismissed the writ petition due to the petitioner's non-prosecution.

What did the court decide?

No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

S.Antony Vs the Secy.to Govt. State of T.N — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.27675 of 2003

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 12.07.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE N.MALA

¶6

W.P.No.27675 of 2003 and

¶7

W.P.M.P.Nos.33287 & 33288 of 2003

S.Antony

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Secretary to Government State of Tamilnadu, Industries Department, Fort St.George,

¶12

Chenai - 600 009.

¶13

The District Collector, Kancheepuram District.

¶14

Kamarajar, Bhahmma Sakthi Blue metal, Dharga Road, Chennai - 43

¶15

... Respondents

¶16

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records concerned in G.O.Ms.No.88/2002 dated 18.10.2002 particularly to Thirisoolam and Thalakanancherry hills at the same time directing the

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 1/4

¶18

W.P.No.27675 of 2003

¶19

third respondent not to proceed with the quarrying operation in Survey No.25/2B, in Pit No.4, of Thirisoolam Hills which falls within 250 meters from the residential area.

¶20

For Petitioner : No appearance For Respondents : Mr.E.Vijay Anand, Additional Government Pleader for R1 and R2 Ms.B.Sripadmaja for R3

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

When the matter was called on 11.07.2023, there was no representation for the petitioner. Therefore, the Registry was directed to list the matter under the caption 'for dismissal' today. Even today, when the matter is called, there is no representation for the petitioner. Therefore, this Court has no other option except to dismiss the writ petition for non-prosecution. Accordingly., the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶23

(J.N.B,J.) (N.M., J.) Index : Yes / No 12.07.2023 vsi

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Page 2/4

W.P.No.27675 of 2003

The Secretary to Government State of Tamilnadu, Industries Department, Fort St.George, Chenai - 600 009.

¶29

The District Collector, Kancheepuram District.

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

Page 3/4

¶32

W.P.No.27675 of 2003

¶33

J. NISHA BANU, J. and N.MALA,J.

¶34

vsi

¶35

W.P.No.27675 of 2003

¶36

12.07.2023

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

Page 4/4

S.Antony v. the Secy.to Govt. State of T.N

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Antony v. the Secy.to Govt. State of T.N

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

P.G.P.Educational and Welfare Vs Anna University

S.Charles, Vs Pallavaram Municipality

Dafinny, Vs The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar

Prathibha Malik and 3 others Vs Smt.Anshuli Arya and 2 others

R.S.Jeyabal, Vs The District Collector

S.Narayanan Vs the State of Tamil Nadu