Madras High CourtWP(MD)/103/2015allowed

C. Chitravelu v. The District Registrar,

2015-11-18Honourable Mr Justice R.Subbiah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 20.04.2018

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.T. SELVAM AND THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI Review Aplw (MD) No.103 of 2015 in WA(MD) No.1549 of 2011 I.Arulanandam .. Review Appellant/Appellant/Petitioner Vs.

1. The Director of Rural Development, Chennai.

2. The Project Director, Vazhndhukattuvom Project, 91, St. Mary's Road, Abiramapuram, Chennai-18.

3. The District Project Manager, Vazhndhukattuvom Project, Tirunelveli District ... Respondents/Respondents/Respondents Review Application filed under Section Order 47 Rule 1 r/w Section 114 of Civil Procedure Code, praying to review the order passed by this Court in WA(MD) No.1549 of 2011 dated 25.09.2014. Prayer in WA(MD).No. 1549/ 2011 :

` Writ Appeal is filed under clause 15 of the letter patent against the order dated 30/11/2011 in WP(MD).No.7106/2009 on the file of this Court.

Prayer in WP(MD).No. 7106/ 2009 :

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the third respondent in his proceedings Na.NO. A1-209-08 dated 30/01/2009 and quash the same and direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue as facilitator. For Applicant :

Mr.Ganesan for M/s.C.S.Associates https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Respondents :

Mr.K.S.Suresh Government Advocate - R1

O R D E R

Applicant filed WP(MD) No.7106 of 2009 seeking the following relief:- "Praying to issue a writ of Certiorarifed Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the order passed by the third respondent in his proceedings Na.No.A1-209-08 dated 30.01.2009 and quash the same and direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue as facilitator". Learned Single Judge dismissed the said writ petition under orders dated 30.11.2011 holding that the writ petition was not maintainable. There against, the petitioner preferred WA(MD) No.1549 of 2011 and in dismissing the same under orders dated 25.09.2014, this Court has also considered the factual aspects and also informed as follows:- "11. Therefore, it is clear that the project, to which the appellant was appointed was of a temporary nature and the appointment was to a society on contract basis. Hence, we find no reason to interefere with the order of the learned Judge."

2. It is not the appellant's case that such factual findings came to be made on erroneous understanding of the facts attending the case. When so, no occasion for review the order in WA(MD) No.1549 of 2011 arises.

3. This Review Application shall stand dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-I) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Director of Rural Development, Chennai.

+1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No.62729. Review Aplw (MD) No.103 of 2015 20.04.2018 kmi RAM/RSK/SAR 1/16.07.2018/2P/3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/