Dismissed¶20

K.Kasi, v. The Government of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC9 Jan 2025WP/22318/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissal of writ petition for want of bona fides / non-prosecution; petitioners avoiding appearance and withholding instructions to counsel; non-compliance with interim direction dated 22.08.2017 to pay 50% of enhanced rent; certiorari against notice Na.Ka.No.3807/2016/A3 dated 03.03.2017 of Commissioner, Ranipet Municipality; Article 226 Constitution of India; W.P.No.22318 of 2017; Government of Tamil Nadu, Municipal Administration; Vellore District; decided 09.01.2025 by C.V. Karthikeyan J.; no costs; connected W.M.P. closed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitioners were avoiding appearance before the Court and avoiding giving instructions to their learned counsel on whether they had complied with the interim direction dated 22.08.2017 to pay 50% of the enhanced rent; there was no bonafide on their part. ¶20

K.Kasi, Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 09.01.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶6

W.P.No.22318 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.23407 of 2017

¶7

1.K.Kasi 2.A.Karthikeyan 3.G.E.Ravi 4.K.Karunakaran 5.N.R.Sankaran 6.N.S.Manikandan 7.H.Babu 8.G.C.Chandrasekaran

¶8

9.M.Vijayakumar 10.K.Poovaraghavan .. Petitioners Vs. 1.The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶9

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

¶10

¶11

2.The Director of Municipal Administration, Municipal Administration Department, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶12

3.The Regional Director of Municipal Administration, Sarathi Nagar, Kagitha Pattarai, Vellore – 12.

¶13

4.The District Collector, Vellore District, Vellore.

¶14

5.The Commissioner, Ranipet Municipality, Vellore District, Vellore. .. Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned notice vide Na.Ka.No.3807/2016/A3 dated 03.03.2017 of the 5^th respondent and to quash the same.

¶16

For	Petitioner	.. Mr.U.Mehrunisha
For	R1, R2 & R3	.. Dr.T.Seenivasan, Spl. Govt. Pleader
For	R4	.. Mr.N.Naveenkumar, Govt. Advocate
For	R5	.. Mr.O.Selvam

¶17

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

¶18

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioners stated that he had addressed a letter to the writ petitioners seeking instructions. Though the letter had been received, the petitioners have not responded to the notice of the learned counsel. It is obvious that the writ petitioners are avoiding appearance before this Court and also avoiding to give instructions to the learned counsel whether they had complied with the interim direction dated 22.08.2017 to pay 50% of the enhanced rent. There is no bonafide on the part of the writ petitioners. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶21

09.01.2025 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No smv

¶22

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

¶23

¶24

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

¶25

smv

¶26

¶27