- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 8 June 2023
- Bench
- B.Pugalendhi
- Case no.
- WP(MD) 11174/2017
Judgment
ORDER The petitioner has approached this Court with a grievance that his representation dated 30.03.2017, which was submitted for getting approval to receive the seized electronic goods, was not considered by the 1st respondent.
2.This Court without expressing anything on the merits of the matter directs the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated
30.03.2017 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
3.This writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. No costs.
08.06.2023 Internet : Yes / No To The Director, Ministry of Environment and Forest, New Delhi.
B.PUGALENDHI, J. dsk
08.06.2023
Case details
Parties and counsel
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 08.06.2023 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI B.Saroja ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Director, Ministry of Environment and Forest, New Delhi. 2.DHL Express India (Pvt) Limited, Plot No.37, Bengaluru International Air Port, Devanahalli, Bengaluru – 560 300. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 30.03.2017 to grant MOEF approval to enable the petitioner to receive the electronic items which were detained at Bangalore International Airport. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Sundaravadivel For Respondent : Mr.K.R.Laxman No.1
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.