Writ Petition filed under Article 226 to quash proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Kerosene Control Order. Petitioner's counsel endorsed the petition as infructuous. Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous without costs.
Writ Petition 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.3275 of 2005
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.01.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.3275 of 2005
S.Rangaswamy
... Petitioner
Vs.
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the proceedings of the 1st respondent made in Na.Ka.No.6185/2005/K2 dated 28.01.2005 and quash the same and a consequential mandamus forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 from invoking the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Kerosene Control (Regulation of Trade) Order 1973 without finding pursuant to the FIR No.23 dated 24.01.2005.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Peter Francis For Respondents : Mr.G.Krishna Raja, Additional Government Pleader
Page 1 of 3
W.P.No.3275 of 2005
O R D E R
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, made a submission that the writ petition has become infructuous. He has also made an endorsement to that effect.
24.01.2024
skr Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes / No
To
Page 2 of 3
W.P.No.3275 of 2005
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
skr
W.P.No.3275 of 2005
24.01.2024
Page 3 of 3
2 provisions across 2 enactments
S.Rangaswamy
The District Supply Officer, Erode
The Inspector of Food Cell, Civil Supply, CID, Erode
S.M.Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
