L. Murugan v. Gagandeep Singh Bedi IAS
Case brief
What is this about?
Contempt petitions were closed because the Supreme Court took cognizance of the underlying matter, granting liberty to revive upon the final outcome of the higher court.
What did the court decide?
Petitioners granted liberty to revive petitions based on Supreme Court outcome.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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.
CONT.P.(MD)Nos.1713 to 1718 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22.11.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
CONT.P.(MD)Nos.1713 to 1718 of 2023 in
WP(MD) Nos.8642,8657,8656,8585,8654 & 8655 of 2019
CONT.P.(MD)Nos.1713 of 2023:-
- L. Murugan
- S.Anthonimuthu 3. M.Muthumari 4. A.Govindan 5. N.Ramalakshmi
- A.Gnanapon 7. A.Uthandan
- S.Singari 9. P.Vetrivel 10. M.Palaniyammal ... Petitioners Vs
- 1.Gagandeep Singh Bedi, I.A.S., The State of Tamilnadu, Rep.By its Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 9.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
L. Murugan and others
- respondent
Gagandeep Singh Bedi
- respondent
Tmt.Mythili K.Rajendran
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court