Dismissed¶25

The President v. the Additional Labour Commissioner

Madras HC17 Jul 2026WP/22865/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Non-prosecution dismissal of writ petition; certiorari against order dated 01.06.2023 in Appeal Case No.7/2019 of Additional Labour Commissioner Appellate Authority under Payment of Gratuity Act; petitioner Kuppam Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society; no representation on two hearing dates; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed; Madras High Court; K. SURENDER J.; Article 226.

What did the court decide?

There was no representation on behalf of the petitioner when the matter was heard on 19.06.2026; the case was adjourned to afford an opportunity to prosecute, yet again there was no representation even on the adjourned date (17.07.2026). ¶24

The President Vs the Additional Labour Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

WP No. 22865 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 17-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K. SURENDER

¶6

WP No. 22865 of 2024 and

¶7

WMP Nos. 24913 & 55031 OF 2025

¶8

The President

¶9

HH 525,Kuppam Primary Agricultural Co-operative, Credit Society, Kuppam, Polur Taluk, Tiruvannamalai 606 904.

¶10

..Petitioner(s)

¶11

¶12

The Additional Labour Commissioner Appeallate Authority Under Payment Of Gratuity Act, Teynampet, Chennai.

¶13

The Deputy Commissioner Of Labour Vellore.

¶14

K.Adikesavan

¶15

..Respondent(s)

¶16

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order dated 01.06.2023 made in Appeal Case No.7/2019 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same.

¶17

For Petitioner(s): Mr.Dhalapathy Vignesh Kumar For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Chakkaravarthy, Government Counsel for R1 and R2 R3-NA

¶18

Page1 of 3

¶19

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

WP No. 22865 of 2024

ORDER

K.SURENDER J.

JAI

When the matter came up for hearing on 19.06.2026, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. In order to afford an opportunity to the petitioner to prosecute the case, the case was adjourned today. Even today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.

¶25