You may also like...
-
Elephant case justice barathidasan order
by Sekar Reporter · Published December 11, 2021
-
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D. BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY In view of the above answers, I am in agreement with the findings of the Trial Court in respect of all the five issues framed and this Appeal Suit is without any merit. Appeal Suit No. 1267 of 2003 1. Hari Ohm Estates repd. by Partner, C Subramaniam. For Appellants : M/s J.R.K. Bhavanantham For Respondents : M/s V. Gangatharan (for R1 & R4) : M/s. P.B. Ramanjujam (for R3) : M/s. P. Veena Suresh (for R10) : R6 – DIED. : Notice served (R2, 5, 7, 8, 9) JUDGMENT
by Sekar Reporter · Published February 8, 2023
-
In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present appeals succeed. The impugned judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the Division Bench of the High Court as well as that of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition and refusing to issue the writ of quo warranto declaring the appointment of respondent No. 1 as Vice Chancellor of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, Thiruvananthapuram as bad in law and/or illegal and void ab initio are hereby quashed and set aside. The writ petition is allowed. There shall be a writ of quo warranto declaring the appointment of the respondent No. 1 as Vice Chancellor of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, Thiruvananthapuram as void ab initio and consequently, the appointment of respondent No. 1 as Vice Chancellor of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, Thiruvananthapuram is quashed and set aside. Present appeals are accordingly allowed. No costs.
by Sekar Reporter · Published October 24, 2022




