The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's application dated 23.08.2016 on merits and to issue license for running the flour mill bearing name Thirumurugan Flour Mill at No.12, Cuddappa Road, Janaki Raman Nagar, Puthagaram, Chennai-600 099.
2.When the matter is taken up today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the writ petition has become infructuous as the petitioner has vacated the premises and he has also made an endorsement to that effect.
3.Since the petitioner has vacated the premises after filing the writ petition, this Court is of the view that nothing survives for adjudication in this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are dismissed.
11.01.2017 kal To
1.The Corporation of Chennai, Rep. by its Commissioner, Rippon Buildings, Chennai-600 003.
2.The Revenue Officer, The Corporation of Chennai, Zone III, Madhavaram, No.1, Thattakulam Road, Madhavaram, Chennai-600 060.
T. RAJA, J kal W. P. No. 30185 of 2016 & W.M.P.No.26586 of 2016 & W.M.P.No.26163 of 2016 11.01.2017 W.P.No.24805 of 2010 & M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2010 T. RAJA. J., This matter is listed today under the caption "for being spoken to."
2. The petitioner already suffered an order of recovery for a sum of Rs.20,587/- vide proceedings No.Dir.E2/559/2003, dated 28.08.2003. The petitioner has filed the Writ Petition in W.P.No.16704 of 2007 challenging the re-fixation of pay in the post of Superintendent due to irregular advancement to Selection Grade in the post of Superintendent and the consequent revision of pay in the promotional post of Assistant Director made Pro.Dte.No.E2/559/2003, dated 05.05.2003.
3. In view of the fact that the petitioner having chosen not to challenge the recovery order passed in proceedings No.Dir.E2/559/2003, dated 28.08.2003, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the recovery order, not only for the reason that he failed to challenge the earlier order dated 28.08.2003 but also, on the ground of inordinate delay in challenging the said proceedings till 2010. In the present proceedings, the said T. RAJA. J., smn amount of Rs.20,587/- had already been recovered from the petitioner in the year 2003 itself.
4. In view of the above, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. Further, it is made clear that on 13.06.2011 though this Court partly allowed the Writ Petition regarding the excess pay and allowances amounting to Rs.20,587/- recovered from the petitioner's DCRG, in view of the reasonings given above, the said amount need not be refunded to her. Accordingly, it is clarified. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
15.07.2011 smn W.P.No.24805 of 2010 http://www.judis.nic.in