Disposed¶35

S. Vinoth v. the Director Meast

Madras HC9 Dec 2025WP/19244/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition (Article 226, certiorarified mandamus) by S.Vinoth challenging order dated 14.06.2006 of the Director, Meast Academy of Architecture; sought continuation of 8th semester B.Arch course and viva voce before Controller of Examination, Anna University; original counsel deceased, substitute counsel absent without instructions; 19 years elapsed, nothing survives; writ petition disposed of as infructuous, no costs; High Court of Judicature at Madras, decided 09.12.2025 by D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.

What did the court decide?

Nothing survives for adjudication at this stage: the relief sought pertains to continuation of the 8th semester Bachelor of Architecture course and 19 years have elapsed. ¶32

S. Vinoth Vs the Director Meast — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.No.19244 of 2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 09.12.2025

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶5

W.P.No.19244 of 2006

¶6

S.Vinoth

¶7

S/o.Sundaram, No.21/87, Nallanna Mudali Street, Royapettah, Chennai – 600 014.

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

¶10

1.The Director Meast, Academy of Architecture, (Inside New College), Chennai – 600 014.

¶11

2.Controller of Examination, Anna University, Guindy, Chennai – 600 025. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for an issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent dated 14.06.2006 and to quash the same and consequently, to permit the petitioner to continue the 8th semester

¶13

1/6

¶14

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

¶15

W.P.No.19244 of 2006 course for Bachelor of Degree in Architecture in the 1st respondent institute and also to attend the viva voce for 8th semester practical training for the course of Bachelor of Architecture.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.M.V.Venkata Seshan For Respondents : M/s.M.Arunkumar for R1 : M/s.G.M.Mani Associates for R2

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 14.06.2006

¶19

passed by the 1st respondent and seeking to quash the same and consequently,

¶20

to permit the petitioner to continue the 8th semester course for the Bachelor’s

¶21

Degree in Architecture in the 1st respondent institute and to attend the viva

¶22

voce for 8th semester practical training for the said course.

¶23

On the last occasion, it was represented that the original learned

¶24

Counsel on record is no more and learned Counsel representing the petitioner

¶25

submitted that she would obtain instructions as to whether anything survives in

¶26

the matter.

¶27

2/6

¶28

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

¶29

W.P.No.19244 of 2006

¶30

¶31

It is evident that the relief sought pertains to the continuation of

¶32

the 8th semester course of the Bachelor of Architecture, and 19 years have elapsed. Therefore, nothing survives for adjudication at this stage. Although the learned Counsel representing the petitioner took time to obtain instructions,

¶33

today she has not appeared, and no instructions have been obtained.

¶34