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

R.Senthil Vel vs State Of Tamilnadu on 3 March, 2010

Author: R.Sudhakar

Bench: R.Sudhakar

       

  

  

 
 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated  3.3.2010

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR

Writ Petition No.13943 of 2009
and
M.P.Nos.2 and 3 of 2009

1.  R.SENTHIL VEL                        
2.  R.KUMARAVEL 
3.  R.SARAVANA VEL 

4.  P.BADRINATH
     DIRECTOR,
     M/S. PRAGATHI HOUSING PRIVATE LTD  
     AT PRESENT KNOWN AS 
     M/S. VASAVI HOUSING INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,
     NO.8A KANDASWAMY ST.,
     R.A.PURAM,
     CHENNAI 28.                                             ... PETITIONERS

VS.

1.  STATE OF TAMILNADU,                          
     REP BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
     HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPT.,
     SECRETARIAT,  
     FORT ST.GEORGE,
     CHENNAI 9.

2.  THE DIRECTOR OF TOWN AND
     COUNTRY PLANNING,
     NO.807 ANNA SALAI,
     CHENNAI 2.

3.  THE CHENNAI METROPOLITAN
     WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD,
     REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
     NO.1 PUMPING STATION ROAD,  
     CHENNAI 2.

4.  MAMALAPURAM LOCAL PLANNING  AUTHORITY,
     REP BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY,
     NO.131 G.S.T. ROAD,
     CHENGALPATTU-1.                                   ... RESPONDENTS
  
     

	Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for records of the impugned order issued by the 4th respondent vide his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.987/Ma.U.Ti.Ku dt.11.6.2009 and quash in respect of SerialNo.2 viz., infrastructure and amenities charges in the impugned order.       
 

		For petitioner         :  M/s.Samanta & Ston	  	

		For respondents     :  Mr.R.Murali for R1 and 2 

					   :  Mr.G.S.Mohan for R3

					   :  Mr.I.Paranthaman for R4

  -----
O R D E R

Learned counsel for the petitioner on instruction submitted a letter to the Registry stating that the petitioner do not want to proceed the matter and permit the petitioner to withdraw the matter with liberty to file fresh writ petition. Writ Petition may be posted for withdrawal. Accordingly, he states that this Writ Petition may be dismissed as withdrawn. In such view of the matter, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh writ petition if he so desire. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Index:    No                                                        3.3.2010
Internet:Yes  

ts

To

1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPT., SECRETARIAT, FORT ST.GEORGE, CHENNAI 9.

2. THE DIRECTOR OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING, NO.807 ANNA SALAI, CHENNAI 2.

3. THE CHENNAI METROPOLITAN WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD, REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, NO.1 PUMPING STATION ROAD, CHENNAI 2.

4. MEMBER SECRETARY, MAMALAPURAM LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY, NO.131 G.S.T. ROAD, CHENGALPATTU-1.

R.SUDHAKAR,J.

ts.

Order in W.P.No.13943 of 2009 3.3.2010