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 0, Cited by 1]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

P.Dharani vs Govt. Of Tamil Nadu And Ors. on 21 July, 2017

Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel, Uday Umesh Lalit

                                                     1

     ITEM NO.6                              COURT NO.12                 SECTION XII

                                   S U P R E M E C O U R T O F      I N D I A
                                           RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)                   No(s).   32315/2014

     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30-06-2014
     in WP No. 10668/2014 passed by the High Court Of Madras)

     P.DHARANI                                                           Petitioner(s)

                                                    VERSUS

     GOVT. OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.                                        Respondent(s)

(Appln(s) for exemption from filing C/c of the impugned Judgment, permission to file additional documents, with interim relief) Date : 21-07-2017 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Ms. Lata Krishnamurti,Adv.
Dr. B. kalaivannan,Adv.
Mr. Neeraj Shekhar, AOR Mr. Ashutosh Thakur,Adv. Mr. Animesh Kumar,Adv.
Mr. Ajay Awasthi,Adv.
Mr. P.R. Shankar,Adv.
Mr. S. Syed Mahaboob,Adv. Mr. P.R. Balasubramanian,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. R. Venkataramani,Sr.Adv.
Mr. R. Nedumaran, AOR Mr. S. Raj Gundela,Adv.
Mr. Praveen Vignesh,Adv.
Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna,Adv.
Ms. Nithya,Adv.
Ms. Maha Lakshmi,Adv.
Ms. Partha Sarathi,Adv.
Mr. B. Balaji, AOR Signature Not Verified UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following Digitally signed by MAHABIR SINGH Date: 2017.07.21 17:21:35 IST Reason: O R D E R Heard.
Mr. Venkataramani, learned senior counsel appearing for 2 respondent no.3, states that the petitioner has already retired. Under the circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.
The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.
Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(MAHABIR SINGH) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR