Writ petition seeking mandamus for action against a private respondent based on representations; counsel submitted the petition had become infructuous and made an endorsement to that effect.
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.
WP(MD)No.4917 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated: 19.02.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
WP(MD)No.4917 of 2018
Muthukrishnan
... Petitioner
Vs
Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034.
Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV corporation, Khadi Craft Building Junction, Tiruchirappalli.
3.Kannan
... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to take appropriate action against the 3rd respondent based on the petitioner's representation dated 18.01.2018 and 01.02.2018.
For Petitioner : Mr.TM.Madasamy For Respondent : Mrs.S.Devasena Nos.1 and 2
For Respondent : No appearance No.3
1/3
WP(MD)No.4917 of 2018
ORDER
When the writ petition is taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel appearing for petitioner submits that the writ petition has become infructuous and he has also made an endorsement to that effect.
2.Recording the above submission and
the endorsement, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
19.02.2024
Internet : Yes / No
DSK
To
2/3
WP(MD)No.4917 of 2018
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
dsk
WP(MD)No.4917 of 2018
19.02.2024
3/3
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Muthukrishnan
The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation Limited
The Special Tahsildar, Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation
Kannan
B.Pugalandhi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
