Fathima Azad Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

2.The Registrar Of Societies, Madras South, SIDCO Electronic Complex, 3rd Phase, Thiru.Vi.Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-32. 3.The Commissioner of Police No.132, EVK Sampath Road, Vepary Periyamet, Chennai-600 003.

¶14

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

¶15

2/5

¶16

WP No. 25442 of 2025

¶17

4.The Inspector of Police Thiruvanmiyur Police Station, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai.

5.V.V.Balaraman

6.M.Chenthurnathan

7.R.Selvaraj

Respondent(s)

PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to restore the original common water supply pipeline which supplies water to the household of petitioner and restore their access to the common utilities and remove the new separate exclusive water pipeline installed and take punitive action against the respondents numbers 5,6 and 7 herein and grant such other further relief as may be deemed fit and proper by this Court in the facts and circumstances of the case, award costs.

¶23

For Petitioner(s): Mr.P.V.Ravi Chandran For Respondent(s): Mr.E.Veda Bagath Singh Special Government Pleader for R1 and R2 Mr.V.Meganathan Government Advocate for R3 and R4

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The relief as sought for in the present writ petition is unsustainable, since

¶26

the petitioner is asking for restoration of the water supply pipelines from the

¶27

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

¶28

3/5

¶29

WP No. 25442 of 2025

¶30

respondents who have nothing to do with this process. When this was pointed

¶31

out, the learned counsel for the petitioners sought for the permission of this Court to withdraw this writ petition and to file a fresh writ petition by seeking for the appropriate relief by adding the relevant respondents and he has also

¶32

made an endorsement to that effect.

¶33

2.In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No

¶34

Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶35

15-07-2025

¶36

Index:Yes/No

¶37

Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No

¶38

ssr

¶39

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

4/5

WP No. 25442 of 2025

To

The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu Department of Law and Social Justice, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

¶44

2.The Registrar of Societies, Madras South, SIDCO Electronic Complex, 3rd Phase, Thiru.Vi.Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-32.

¶45

3.The Commissioner of Police No.132, EVK Sampath Road, Vepary Periyamet, Chennai-600 003.

¶46

4.The Inspector of Police Thiruvanmiyur Police Station, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai.

¶47

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

¶48

5/5

¶49

WP No. 25442 of 2025

¶50

N.ANAND VENKATESH J.

¶51

ssr

¶52

WP No. 25442 of 2025

¶53

15-07-2025

¶54

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

Fathima Azad v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fathima Azad v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Daimler India Commercial Vehicles Pvt. Ltd. Vs Additional Director General of Foreign Trade

Julia Mary Pushparaj, Vs Mr. N. Murali

Salem East District Sand and M Sand Lorry Owners Welfare Association Vs a.Aswini

M/S.Shree Balaji Enterprises Vs the Senior Divisional Mechanical Engineer

Gnanaprakasam Vs the District Collector

S.Jagadeesan Vs the District Registrar