You may also like...
-
Tenant case s vaithiyanathan judge full orderRegistry is directed to send a copy of this order to MHAA, MBA and Women Lawyers’ Association to inform the members of the respective Associations that they should not defend a dishonest Tenant, who happens to be a deceitful Advocate, like the petitioner herein, who is not a gentleman, in order to safeguard the reputation of this profession. An Advocate, who happens to be a tenant, should be a gentleman and shall vacate the premises within 30 days, if request is made by the landlord. If that happens, a Lawyer will get a house on rent even without a written agreement. Some of the Advocates are now-a-days looked at as Rowdies and third rate criminals by public by the conduct of similar to the one of the tenant in this case. It is painful to say that many of the Advocates are involved in the land grabbing and if the antecedent of the petitioner / S.VAIDYANATHAN,J., jrs/ar tenant is verified, he may also be one of the land grabbers. The tenant has scant regard for the orders of the Court and he has portrayed sadistic attitude. With the above observations and directions, this Civil Miscellaneous Petition stands closed. 03.02.2021
by Sekar Reporter · Published March 30, 2021
-
-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) W.M.P.No. of 2021 IN W.P.No. 13384 of 2021 Suba.Veerapandian advocate arul.moli mam –I submit that the speculation of an interested party to a litigation cannot create a ground for Public Interest Litigation. The fact that there is a large number of students in rural areas and sub-urban localities who are not opting for Science Groups in Higher Secondary Level and the number of students dropping out without writing NEET exam after filing applications are also a matter for concern of the state. Further, the lower middle class children especially the women students are not enjoying the luxury of staying at home for 2 or 3 years to make consecutive attempts to write the NEET and secure admission. These adversities are not limited to the points mentioned above alone. Even assuming that state decides to submit a review application to reconsider the decision dated 29.04.2020 made in CMC, Vellore Vs Union Of India, the state needs a data collected by a competent Committee. Hence constituting a committee to examine effects of NEET cannot be considered as an effort to thwart the judgment of the Supreme Court.
by Sekar Reporter · Published July 5, 2021