Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

N.Palanivel vs The Principal Chief Conservator ...

Madras High Court|22 November, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission that during the pendency of the writ petition, the respondents have promoted the writ petitioner and therefore, no further adjudication is required in respect of other consequential benefits. The writ petitioner is at liberty to submit appropriate representation to the competent officials and on receipt of the same, the respondents are at liberty to consider the same and in accordance with law.
2.With these observations, the writ petition stands closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. 22.11.2017 kak Index:Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order:Yes/No To
1.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, O/o.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, (Head of Forest Force) Panagal Maaligai, Saidapet, Chennai  15.
2.The District Forest Officer, Villupuram Forest Division, Villupuram.
3.The District Forest Officer, Trichirapalli Division, Trichy  1.
4.The District Forest Officer, Perambalur.
5.The Ranger, Forest Department, Perambalur Division, Perambalur.
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.
kak W.P.No.19698 of 2010 22.11.2017
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

N.Palanivel vs The Principal Chief Conservator ...

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
22 November, 2017