The Writ Petition was dismissed as infructuous upon representation by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the writ petition had become infructuous.
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 THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN
AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN
WRIT PETITION No.29516 OF 2018
ORDER(ORAL): (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V. Ramasubramanian)
It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the
writ petition has become infructuous.
Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order
as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the
Writ Petition stand dismissed as infructuous.
______________________________________ THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, CJ
V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J August 21, 2018. PV
Petitioner
Respondent
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan
V. Ramasubramanian
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
