Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 2]

Madras High Court

K.Krishnamurthy vs The Union Of India on 9 February, 2017

Author: K.K. Sasidharan

Bench: K.K.Sasidharan, V.Parthiban

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
										
DATED: 09.02.2017

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN
			
W.P.No.3542 of 2013 and
MP.No.1 of 2013
1.K.Krishnamurthy
2.N.Ravishankar
3.T.Selvam				...Petitioners

vs.

1.The Union of India,
   Represented by the Secretary to Government,
  Home Department, 
  Government of Union Territory of Puducherry
  Puducherry.

2.The Inspector General of Police,
  Police Department, Puducherry.

3.The Senior Superintendent of Police (Head Quarters)
  Police Department, Puducherry.

4.S.Selvanathan
5.A.Balasubramanian
6.V.Renjith
7.T.Manivannan
8.M.Dasarathan
9.E.Dhatchinamurthy

10.The Central Administrative Tribunal
  Additional Bench at Chennai,
  Rep. by its Registrar,
  Chennai - 600 104.	...Respondents


	Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records on the file of the tenth respondent, dated 27.11.2012 in O.A.No.470 of 2010 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to fix the seniority of 1999 selectees in accordance with the rotation of vacancies and above the later selectees.

		For Petitioners	:  Mr.Bharathachakravarthy for
					   M/s.Sai Bharath and Ilan
	
		For Respondents	:  Mr.ManisundarGopal for R1
					   Mr.Syed Mustafa, Spl.G.P.
					   for R2 and R3
					   Mr.M.Gnanasekar for RR4,5,8 and 9
					   R10 - Tribunal 
					   R6 - Not ready in Notice

O R D E R

K.K. SASIDHARAN,J.

The learned counsel for the petitioners made an endorsement indicating that he is withdrawing the writ petition, in view of the subsequent developments and more particularly, the order passed by the respondents dated 18 August 2015, pursuant to the order in W.P.No.2684 of 2013, with liberty to challenge the proceedings, if the parties are so advised.

2. In view of the endorsement so made, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

(K.K.SASIDHARAN, J.) (V.PARTHIBAN, J.) 9 February 2017 svki To

1.The Secretary to Government, The Union of India, Home Department, Government of Union Territory of Puducherry Puducherry.

2.The Inspector General of Police, Police Department, Puducherry.

3.The Senior Superintendent of Police (Head Quarters) Police Department, Puducherry.

4.The Registrar, The Central Administrative Tribunal Additional Bench at Chennai, Chennai - 600 104.

K.K.SASIDHARAN,J.

and V.PARTHIBAN,J.

(svki) W.P.No.3542 of 2013 09.02.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in