Dismissed¶21

Chandrahasan v. The Revenue Divisional officer

Madras HC12 Mar 2026WP/33789/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; no adjudication of merits. Subject matter of withdrawn challenge: deemed suspension order dated 25.03.2017 and subsequent order dated 29.06.2019 passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kallakurichi, Villupuram District; relief sought: certiorarified mandamus to quash and reinstate petitioner with consequential service and monetary benefits. Keywords: Article 226, Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, deemed suspension, withdrawal, endorsement, WMP.No.33295 of 2022, Madras High Court, Justice Mohammed Shaffiq, 12-03-2026.

What the court decided

AI extract

Chandrahasan Vs The Revenue Divisional officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

WP No. 33789 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 12-03-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ WP No. 33789 of 2022

¶6

and WMP.No.33295 of 2022

¶7

Chandrahasan

¶8

S/o.Subbarayan, Manjaputhur Village, Sankarapuram Taluk, Villupuram District.

¶9

..Petitioner(s)

¶10

¶11

The Revenue Divisional officer Kallakurichi, villupuram District.

¶12

..Respondent(s)

¶13

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of deemed suspension passed by the respondent in ROC.No.A1/2138/ 2017, dated 25.03.2017 and the subsequent order passed by the respondent in Letter bearing Na.Ka.A1 / 2138 /2018 dated 29.06.2019 and quash the same and direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service and grant him all consequential service and monetary benefits.

¶14

For Petitioner(s): Mr. P.Arumugavel

¶15

For Respondent(s): Mr. Yogesh Kannadasan Special Government Pleader

¶16

__________ Page1 of 3

¶17

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

¶18

WP No. 33789 of 2022

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Today when the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for petitioner sought permission of this Court to withdraw the writ petition. He has also made an endorsement to that effect.

¶21

Recording the submission and endorsement made by the learned counsel for petitioner, the writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶22

12-03-2026

¶23

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

¶24

ANU

¶25

¶26

The Revenue Divisional officer Kallakurichi, villupuram District.

¶27

__________ Page2 of 3

¶28