Follow:
- Next story K. Chandru Former Judge Of Highcourt: The payment of gratuity is not dealt with by Labour officers. If it is an establishment coming under State govt, then the controlling authority is “Asst.commissioner of Labour, of that area. The form N is provided under the Rules contained along with bare Act
- Previous story Justice G R Swaminathan said that in the present case the vehicle is yet to be produced before the jurisdictional court and hence the writ court definitely has the power to direct release of the vehicle. The judge said that neither the petitioner nor the vehicle is involved in any previous case of the same nature. The counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remit a sum of Rs 20,000 as non-refundable cost for release of the vehicle.
Recent Posts
- Justice Anand Venkatesh was referring to T. Wilson v. District Collector, Kanyakumari Dist and Ors. (2021) where a coordinate bench had held that a religious right cannot be claimed to be absolute and prayer meetings
- Fine MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU A No. 1464 of 2025 in C.S.N0.176 of 2024 K.R.Singamuthu
- MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE W.P(MD)No.3482 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD) No.2464 of 2025 M.Daniel Simiyon Sudan … Petitioner Vs 1. The District Collector,
- 23.In the present writ petition, regarding the facts of the present writ petition, the respondents are directed to initiate enforcement action by following the procedures as contemplated under the Act and Rules and demolish the unauthorized constructions, if any, identified, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 24.With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 25.Registry is directed to list the matter on 07.08.2025 for reporting compliance. [S.M.S., J.] [A.D.M.C., J.] 10.06.2025 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No NCC:Yes/No LR To 1. The District Collector,Tiruchirappalli District, Tiruchirappalli. 2. The Tahsildar, Srirangam Taluk, Tiruchirappalli District. 3. The Block Development Officer, Manikandam Union, Tiruchirappalli District. 4. The Village President,Punganur Panchayat, Tiruchirappalli. 5. The State of Tamil Nadu, The Chief Secretary, Fort St.George, Chennai – 9. S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. and DR.A.D.MARIA CLETE, J. LR W.P(MD)No.3482 of 2025 10.06.2025
- view of the above, this Court is inclined to set aside the order dated 04.04.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.36253 of 2024 in S.C.No.426 of 2024 on the file of the I Additional Sessions Court, Chennai. Accordingly, it is hereby set aside and the petitioner is discharged from the charge under Section 306 of IPC. 12. In the result, this Criminal Revision Case stands allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 09.06.2025 Index : Yes/No Neutral citation : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order Lpp To 1. The I Additional Sessions Judge,Chennai. 2. The Inspector of Police (L &O),F-2, Egmore Police Station, Egmore, Chenani – 600 008. 3. The Public Prosecutor,High Court, Madras. of 11 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J. Lpp Crl.R.C.No.689 of 2025 09.06.2025 of 11
More
Recent Posts
- Justice Anand Venkatesh was referring to T. Wilson v. District Collector, Kanyakumari Dist and Ors. (2021) where a coordinate bench had held that a religious right cannot be claimed to be absolute and prayer meetings
- Fine MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU A No. 1464 of 2025 in C.S.N0.176 of 2024 K.R.Singamuthu
- MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE W.P(MD)No.3482 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD) No.2464 of 2025 M.Daniel Simiyon Sudan … Petitioner Vs 1. The District Collector,
- 23.In the present writ petition, regarding the facts of the present writ petition, the respondents are directed to initiate enforcement action by following the procedures as contemplated under the Act and Rules and demolish the unauthorized constructions, if any, identified, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 24.With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 25.Registry is directed to list the matter on 07.08.2025 for reporting compliance. [S.M.S., J.] [A.D.M.C., J.] 10.06.2025 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No NCC:Yes/No LR To 1. The District Collector,Tiruchirappalli District, Tiruchirappalli. 2. The Tahsildar, Srirangam Taluk, Tiruchirappalli District. 3. The Block Development Officer, Manikandam Union, Tiruchirappalli District. 4. The Village President,Punganur Panchayat, Tiruchirappalli. 5. The State of Tamil Nadu, The Chief Secretary, Fort St.George, Chennai – 9. S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. and DR.A.D.MARIA CLETE, J. LR W.P(MD)No.3482 of 2025 10.06.2025
- view of the above, this Court is inclined to set aside the order dated 04.04.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.36253 of 2024 in S.C.No.426 of 2024 on the file of the I Additional Sessions Court, Chennai. Accordingly, it is hereby set aside and the petitioner is discharged from the charge under Section 306 of IPC. 12. In the result, this Criminal Revision Case stands allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 09.06.2025 Index : Yes/No Neutral citation : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order Lpp To 1. The I Additional Sessions Judge,Chennai. 2. The Inspector of Police (L &O),F-2, Egmore Police Station, Egmore, Chenani – 600 008. 3. The Public Prosecutor,High Court, Madras. of 11 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J. Lpp Crl.R.C.No.689 of 2025 09.06.2025 of 11
