SEKAR REPORTER Blog
![Sekarreporter1: https://wwwsekarreporter.wordpress.com/2022/09/11/9-11-1034-duraivaiyapuri-mhc-advt-justice-v-ramasubramanian-judgment-in-writ-petition-nos-27809-to-27811-and-27973-to-27975-of-2014-dated-05-11-2014-at-madras-high-court-it-should-be-pointed-ou/ [9/11, 10:42] Sekarreporter1: [9/11, 10:34] DURAIVAIYAPURI Mhc Advt: Justice V.Ramasubramanian judgment in Writ Petition Nos.27809 to 27811 and 27973 to 27975 of 2014 dated 05.11.2014 at Madras High Court: –](https://www.sekarreporter.com/wp-content/themes/hueman/assets/front/img/thumb-medium-empty.png)
Sekarreporter1: https://wwwsekarreporter.wordpress.com/2022/09/11/9-11-1034-duraivaiyapuri-mhc-advt-justice-v-ramasubramanian-judgment-in-writ-petition-nos-27809-to-27811-and-27973-to-27975-of-2014-dated-05-11-2014-at-madras-high-court-it-should-be-pointed-ou/ [9/11, 10:42] Sekarreporter1: [9/11, 10:34] DURAIVAIYAPURI Mhc Advt: Justice V.Ramasubramanian judgment in Writ Petition Nos.27809 to 27811 and 27973 to 27975 of 2014 dated 05.11.2014 at Madras High Court: –
[9/11, 10:42] Sekarreporter1: https://wwwsekarreporter.wordpress.com/2022/09/11/9-11-1034-duraivaiyapuri-mhc-advt-justice-v-ramasubramanian-judgment-in-writ-petition-nos-27809-to-27811-and-27973-to-27975-of-2014-dated-05-11-2014-at-madras-high-court-it-should-be-pointed-ou/ [9/11, 10:42] Sekarreporter1: [9/11, 10:34] DURAIVAIYAPURI Mhc Advt: Justice V.Ramasubramanian judgment in Writ Petition Nos.27809 to 27811 and 27973 to 27975 of 2014 dated 05.11.2014 at Madras High Court: –...
Justice Abdul Quddhose opined that the petitioner should have taken up the matter with the Administrative Tribunal dealing with service matters and not approach the High Court in the first instance. No Government servant will be entitled to approach the High Court as a Court of first instance challenging an order passed by the Government regarding a service matter. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ravi For Respondents 1 to 3 & 5 : Mr.Sankaranarayanan, Additional Solictor General Assisted by Ms.R.Hemalatha, CGSC For Respondent 4 : Ms.R.Vaigai, Senior Advocate, for M/s.Anna Mathew
I Justice Abdul Quddhose opined that the petitioner should have taken up the matter with the Administrative Tribunal dealing with service matters and not approach the High Court in the first instance. No Government servant...
GLIMPSE OF A LATEST VERDICT* *Minor V.Amrutha Vs. Council for Archietecture & Anr.* W.P.No.16762 of 2017 Dated: 07.09.2022 *Honourable Mr. Justice R. Subramanian * allowed the Writ Petition and awarded compensation and costs in the matter relating to *“NATA – Education – ”* and further observed and held as follows:
[9/10, 07:27] Sekarreporter1: https://wwwsekarreporter.wordpress.com/2022/09/10/judge-r-subramaniyam-order-view-of-the-above-while-condemning-the-second-respondent-for-its-outrageous-and-inexplicable-conduct-i-direct-the-second-respondent-to-pay-a-compensation-of-rs-1000000/ [9/11, 07:18] Sekarreporter1: *GLIMPSE OF A LATEST VERDICT* *Minor V.Amrutha Vs. Council for Archietecture & Anr.* W.P.No.16762 of 2017 Dated: 07.09.2022 *Honourable Mr. Justice R. Subramanian * allowed the Writ...
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.OP.Nos.6111 & 6130 of 2021 and Crl.MP.Nos.4022, 4023 4037 & 4038 of 2021 Crl.OP.No.6111 of 2021. Passport casePetitioner : Mr.B.Kumar, Senior Counsel for M/s.Usharaman For Respondents For R1 : Mr.A.Gopinath, Government Advocate(crl.side) Accordingly, the entire proceedings in CC.Nos.2031 & 2032 of 2021 on the file of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, thereby taken cognizance for the offences under Section 12(1-A)(a) of Passports Act, in Crime Nos.274 & 303 of 2019 is quashed as against the petitioners and both the criminal original petitions are allowed.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Reserved on : 26.08.2022 Pronounced on : 08.09.2022 CORAM THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.OP.Nos.6111 & 6130 of 2021 and Crl.MP.Nos.4022, 4023 4037 &...
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD Sub. Appl.No.98 of 2019 in Cont.P.No.830 of 2014 in W.P.No.34530 of 2012 The State Transport and Transport Corporations, Retired Employees Welfare Association. For Petitioner : Mr.A.R.L.Sundaresan Senior Counsel for Mr.G.Sankaran For Respondents : Mr.R.Ramanlal Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.C.Selvaraj Government Advocate ORDER directed to pay the enhanced Dearness Allowance to the State Government Transport Retired Employees ,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :02.09.2022 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD Sub. Appl.No.98 of 2019 in Cont.P.No.830 of 2014 in W.P.No.34530 of 2012 The State Transport and Transport...
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.No.21544 of 2022 d)The guidelines stipulated for preliminary enquiry or registration of FIR by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others [2014 (2) SCC (1)] shall be strictly adhere. For Petitioners : Mr.T.Shanmugarajeswaran For Respondent : Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.side) ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08.09.2022 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.No.21544 of 2022 1.S.Prakash 2.Meenakshi Ammal 3.P.Karpagavalli 4.Kumaresan …Petitioners Vs. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch,...