When the matter was taken up for hearing, Ms.R.Maheswari, learned counsel for the petitioner on record submitted that the subject matter of the writ petition has become infructuous. She has also made an endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle.
2. However, on scrutiny of the Court bundle, it is found that the affidavit and the writ petition enclosing the Court fee is unavailable. This Court ordered reconstruction of the bundle and directed Ms.R.Maheswari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.K.Raameshuwar, learned counsel for the Electricity Board to submit their office copies of the writ petition and affidavit. Both of them submitted that in the floods that came in December 2015, all their records were destroyed. The counter affidavit filed by the respondent alone is available in the case bundle. Therefore, the Court Officer was not able to reconstruct the writ petition, affidavit and the stamp paper.
3. Since the learned counsel for the writ petitioner has endorsed that the subject matter of the writ petition has become infructuous, the matter may be put to rest. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
12.01.2017 TK To The Junior Engineer (O&M) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board St. Thomas Mount South Section Meenambakkam, Chennai 600 016.
P.N.PRAKASH, J.
TK W.P.NO.16950 OF 2003 12.01.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in