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

S.Vethanayagam vs The District Educational Officer

Madras High Court|16 February, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

When the case was called on 06.01.2017, no one was representing for the petitioner. Therefore, it was directed to be posted on 11.01.2017 under the caption 'for dismissal'. On 11.01.2017, the learned counsel for the petitioner appeared and he wanted some time on personal reason. Again the matter was listed on 03.02.2017 and 10.02.2017. Both days, he requested for adjournments. Again the matter was posted on 14.02.2017. On that day, neither the petitioner nor the counsel representing the petitioner was present and therefore, it was directed to be posted under the caption for dismissal on today i.e., 16.02.2017. Even today, when the matter was called, no one was representing the petitioner and hence, this Writ Petition is dismissed for default. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed.
To
1.The District Educational Officer, Kovilpatti Educational District, Kovilpatti.
2.The Chief Educational Officer, Tuticorin District, Tuticorin.
3.The Director of School Education, D.P.I. Compound, College Road, Chennai ? 6.
.
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

S.Vethanayagam vs The District Educational Officer

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
16 February, 2017