You may also like...
-
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR W.P.No.17399 of 2022 and WMP.No.16706 of 2022 M.Madhumitha D/o.Medasamy Seenivasalu ..Petitioner Vs. For Petitioner : Mr.L.Chandrakumar For Respondents : Ms.V.Sudha, Central Government Counsel[R1] Mrs.D.Nagasaila Standing Counsel [R2] ORDER Before parting, this Court express its anguish as to the way in which the examination was conducted with full of mess as discussed herein above and also direct the second respondent to avoid these kind of confusions in the future years examination so that the meritorious students may not be deprived of their right to get the chance of admission in the second respondent Institute. With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 12.10.2022
by Sekar Reporter · Published October 20, 2022
-
Thus, the respondents 1 to 3 are directed to pass final orders in the Departmental Disciplinary Proceedings as expeditiously as possible, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, by following the procedure as contemplated. It is made clear that the Departmental Disciplinary Proceedings are independent and therefore, there is no impediment to pass final orders even during the pendency of the criminal case. With these above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 21.11.2022 Index : Yes/No drm To The Additional Chief Secretary to Government Transport Department Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009. The Administrator M/s. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund Trust No.2, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002. The General Manager M/s. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kum) Ltd. Railway Station New Road, Kumbakonam. The Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Collectors Nagar, Alandur, Chennai. The Principal District and Sessions Judge Thanjavur. S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J. (drm) W.P.No.21625 of 2019 and W.M.P.No.20848 of 2019 21.11.2022. For the Petitioner : Mr.D.Soundar Raj For the Respondents : Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja Government Advocate for respondent 1 Mr.S.Rajesh Government Advocate for respondent 4 ORDER The charge memo issued to the writ petitioner in proceedings dated 24.01.2000 and the second show cause notice issued on 01.04.2003 are under challenge in the present writ petition.
by Sekar Reporter · Published November 29, 2022
-
[12/21, 17:54] Nappinai Advt SC — Evidence may be given either through submission of the original electronic document or its copy. If you are relying on a copy (it may be a printout or in electronic form) the electronic record has to be submitted along with the certificate under S. 65B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act. Whilst preparing the certificate please ensure that all three parameters under S. 65B(4) which includes the 4 parameters under S. 65B(2) are covered. Though this is a wrong interpretation by the SC judgment of Anver v. Basheer, it is still the decision that holds good. N. S. Nappinai, Advocate, Supreme Court. [12/21, 17:54] Sekarreporter 1: 🍁
by Sekar Reporter · Published December 21, 2019