SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Mad) 1176

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
R.Poongothai – Appellant
Versus
Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission – Respondent
W.P.(MD)No.7802 of 2021 and W.M.P.(MD)No.5942 of 2021
Decided on : 20-08-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : No appearance
For the Respondents: Mr.J.Anand Kumar Standing Counsel

IMPORTANT POINT
A writ petition can be dismissed for non-prosecution if the petitioner shows a lack of interest in pursuing the case.

Headnote:

Writ Petition - Non-Prosecution - The court dismissed the writ petition for non-prosecution due to the petitioner's lack of interest in pursuing the case, as evidenced by the absence of a new counsel and no further action taken since the last hearing date.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus for the revaluation of her answer sheet for an exam conducted in 2019 and to proceed with the selection process for the post of Assistant System Engineer and Assistant System Analyst.

Finding of the Court:

The court noted that the petitioner had not engaged a new counsel after changing representation and had shown no interest in prosecuting the case, leading to the conclusion that the writ petition should be dismissed.

Issues: Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to the petitioner's inaction and lack of representation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of prosecuting a writ petition actively and the consequences of failing to do so, which justified the dismissal of the case.

Result: The writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution, with no order as to costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

ORDER :

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.03.2021 and e-mail representation dated 22.03.2021 and revalue the Paper-III of her answer sheet bearing Registration No.020012015 for the Exam conducted on 07.04.2019 to the post of Assitant System Engineer and Assistant System Analyst and proceed the selection process subsequently provide the above said post in pursuance with Notification No.05/2019 dated 22.01.2019 issued by the respondents.

On the last hearing date ie., on 09.08.2024, this Court recorded the submission made by the learned Counsel on record for the petitioner that he has already given change of vakalat to another Counsel. Till date, no new Counsel has entered appearance on behalf of the petitioner. Registry has also printed the name of the petitioner in the cause list today, as directed by this Court in its earlier order dated 09.08.2024. The Writ Petition is of the year 2021. It can now be inferred that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting this Writ Petition.

2. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top