S.Ragunath, v. The Chief Commissioner,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 22.07.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P.NO.21627 OF 2014 S.Ragunath ... Petitioner Vs 1.

Chief Commissioner, Information Commission, Chennai - 18.

2.

Public Information Officer, Private School Fee Determination Committee, Chennai - 6.

3.

The Private School Fee Determination Committee, Rep.by its Special Officer, DPI Campus, Chennai - 600 006. ... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus direct to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation letter dated 19.05.2014.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Saranraj For R1 : Mr.Niranjan Rajagopalan for GR Associates

O R D E R

The prayer made in this writ petition is to direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.05.2014.

2. Today, when the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submitted that subsequent to the filing of this writ petition, the petitioner's representation was considered and hence, nothing survives for adjudication.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.In view of the above submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar av To 1.

Chief Commissioner, Information Commission, Chennai - 18.

2.

Public Information Officer, Private School Fee Determination Committee, Chennai - 6.

3.

The Special Officer, The Private School Fee Determination Committee, DPI Campus, Chennai - 600 006.

+1cc to M/s.GR Associates, Advocate, S.R.No.35651 W.P.No.21627 of 2014 PMK(CO) CS/19/08/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/