VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2023 › High Court of Madras

M.Raman v. The Director

WITHDRAWN DISMISSED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
29 September 2023
Bench
Battu Devanandauthor
Case no.
WP(MD) 16359/2019

Judgment

O R D E R When the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr.R.Maheswaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this Writ Petition and he has already circulated a letter dated 26.09.2023, to the Registry for withdrawal of the case, based on the instructions given by the petitioner.

¶2Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the letter sent for withdrawal, permission is granted.

¶3Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶4No costs.

¶5Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

29.09.2023 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes NCC : Yes / No RM To

¶1The Director, Directorate of Local Fund audit, Integrated Complex of Finance Department, Nandhanam, Chennai – 35.

¶2The Commissioner of Municipal Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶3The Commissioner, Puliyankudi Municipality, Puliyankudi, Tirunelveli District.

BATTU DEVANAND, J. RM

29.09.2023

Case details

Parties and counsel

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 29.09.2023 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND and W.M.P.(MD) No.12999 of 2019 M. Raman ...Petitioner Vs. 1. The Director, Directorate of Local Fund audit, Integrated Complex of Finance Department, Nandhanam, Chennai – 35. 2. The Commissioner of Municipal Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005. 3. The Commissioner, Puliyankudi Municipality, Puliyankudi, Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in Moo.Mu.No.36359/Naosa (1)/2017, dated 29.05.2018 and quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the 1st respondent to pay the retirement benefits to the Petitioner along with the monthly pension along with the interest and pass such further or other orders as this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Maheswaran For Respondents : Mr.A.Kannan - for R1 & R2 Additional Government Pleader Mr.M. Rajarajan - for R3

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.