Madras High CourtWP/5788/2015dismissed as infructuous

K.Thayumanavan, v. The Superintendent Of Police,

2024-03-15Honourable Dr Justice D.Nagarjun4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 15.03.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN K.Thayumanavan

...Petitioner

Versus

1.The Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

2.The Deputy Inspector of Police, Villupuram Range, Villupuram.

3.The Director General of Police, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.

4.The State of Tamil Nadu, rep.by Principal Secretary to Government Home (Police V) Dept.

Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.

...Respondents

Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to issue a writ of Certiorari to call for records of the respondents in connection with the impugned orders passed by the 1st respondent in Ref.No.H1/PR778/99 under Section 3 (b) dated 09.06.1999 by the 2nd respondent in C.No.B3/AP11/2002 dated 21.05.2002, by the 3rd respondent in RC No.191259/API (2)/2003 dated 25.09.2003 and by the 4th respondent in GO (2D) No.200 Home (Police V) Department dated 12.06.2014 and quash the same.

1/4

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vigneshraj for Mr.M.Muthappan For Respondents : Mr.R.V.Dineshraj Kumar Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed seeking for writ of Certiorari to call for records of the respondents in connection with the impugned orders passed by the 1st respondent in Ref.No.H1/PR778/99 under Section 3 (b) dated 09.06.1999 by the 2nd respondent in C.No.B3/AP11/2002 dated 21.05.2002, by the 3rd respondent in RC No.191259/API (2)/2003 dated 25.09.2003 and by the 4th respondent in GO (2D) No.200 Home (Police V) Department dated 12.06.2014 and quash the same.

2. When the matter was taken up today for hearing, it is submitted by Mr.M.Vigneshraj for Mr.M.Muthappan, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is no more and he could not succeed in tracing out LR's of the deceased petitioner. Thereby submits to close this petition with a liberty to restore the same as and when the LR's approach the concerned counsel. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed 2/4

as infructuous, giving liberty to the legal representative of petitioner to agitate the cause raised by the petitioner, if still survives. There shall be no order as to costs.

15.03.2024 Speaking Order : Yes/No Index Case : Yes/No : Yes/No nst 3/4

DR.D.NAGARJUN , J.

nst To: