VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2023 › High Court of Madras

Dindigul District Kai Kani Virpanaiyalargal Sangam, v. The District Collector

CLOSED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
15 November 2023
Bench
N. Anand Venkateshauthor
Case no.
WP(MD) 19661/2021

Judgment

O R D E R When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the prayer sought for in the writ petition has become infructuous.

2.Recording the same, this writ petition stands closed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

15.11.2023 NCC : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No PNM To

¶1The District Collector, Dindigul District.

¶2The Commissioner, City Municipal Corporation, Dindigul.

¶3The Block Development Officer, Dindigul Panchayat Union, Office at Near Old Court Buildings, Dindigul.

¶4The Member Secretary, Local Planning Authority, Department of Town and Country Planning, Dindigul District.

¶5The President, Pallapatti Panchayat, Dindigul Taluk, Dindigul.

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J. PNM ORDER IN and WMP(MD)Nos.16334 of 2021 and 2966 of 2022

15.11.2023

Case details

Parties and counsel

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.11.2023 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH and WMP(MD)Nos.16334 of 2021 and 2966 of 2022 Dindigul District Kai Kani Virpanaiyalargal Sangam Rep. By its President S.Mariraj ... Petitioner Vs 1. The District Collector, Dindigul District. 2. The Commissioner, City Municipal Corporation, Dindigul. 3. The Block Development Officer, Dindigul Panchayat Union, Office at Near Old Court Buildings, Dindigul. 4. The Member Secretary, Local Planning Authority, Department of Town and Country Planning, Dindigul District. 5. The President, Pallapatti Panchayat, Dindigul Taluk, Dindigul. 6. Saravanan ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to initiate appropriate action against the 6th respondent and to give adequate protection to the property of the Petitioner Association in S.No.9 and 10/1C2 of Pallapatti Village, Dindigul Taluk, Dindigul District, wherein the petitioner Association is lawfully conducting wholesale Vegetable Vending Market under the license of the 5th respondent by considering the representation of the petitioner, dated 22.10.2021. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Ananthapadmanaban for APN Law Associates For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Manikkam (R1, 3, 4 & 5) Special Government Pleader Mr.J.Lawrance (R2&R6) 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.