- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 13 September 2023
- Bench
- S Justice L.Victoria Gowri
- Case no.
- WP(MD) 18400/2023
Judgment
ORDER The impugned order challenged by the petitioner has been set aside by the respondents and in view of the same, this writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition stands closed.
13.09.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes BTR To
1.The Director / Commissioner for Milk Production and Dairy Development, Chennai-51.
2.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Limited, Chennai-35.
3.The General Manager, The Tirunelveli District Co-operative Milk Producers' Union Limited, Tirunelveli.
4.The General Manager, The Thoothukudi District Co-operative Milk Producers' Union Limited, Thoothukudi.
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
BTR
13.09.2023
Case details
Parties and counsel
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 13.09.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI and W.M.P(MD)No.15273 of 2023 A.Sundaram, Manager (P&I) / (Veterinary), The Tirunelveli District Co-operative Milk Producers' Union Limited, Tirunelveli. ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Director / Commissioner for Milk Production and Dairy Development, Chennai-51. 2.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Limited, Chennai-35. 3.The General Manager, The Tirunelveli District Co-operative Milk Producers' Union Limited, Tirunelveli. 4.The General Manager, The Thoothukudi District Co-operative Milk Producers' Union Limited, Thoothukudi. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to impugned order of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No. 14759/En.1/2023-1, dated 10.07.2023 and the consequential impugned relieving order passed by the third respondent in Ref. No.2583/Admin1/2018, dated 14.07.2023 (received on 24.07.2023) and quash the same as illegal in so far as the petitioner is concerned and consequently restrain the respondent from transferring the petitioner to the fourth respondent union without following due process of law. For Petitioner : Mr.M.E.Ilango For Respondents : Mr.J.Devasenan Standing Counsel
Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.