The writ petition filed by V. John Sundaram and others against the Municipal Commissioner was dismissed as infructuous by the High Court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH
&
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO
W.P. No. 23423 of 2004
DATE: 17.11.2015
Between:
V. John Sundaram and 8 others .. Petitioners
and
The Municipal Commissioner and another .. Respondents
O R D E R:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice G. Chandraiah)
Sri K. Muralidhar Reddy, Advocate, representing Sri G.Tuhin Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners on record, has submitted that the cause of action in this writ petition does not survive and the matter has become infructuous.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is placed on record, and the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. No order as to costs.
As a sequel to the dismissal of the writ petition, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
G. CHANDRAIAH, J
17.11.2015
U.DURGA PRASAD RAO, J
bcj
V. John Sundaram and 8 others
The Municipal Commissioner and another
G. CHANDRAIAH
U. DURGA PRASAD RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
