Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
A. Ayyammal – Petitioner
Versus
The Director, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Chennai – Respondent
W.P. (MD) No. 11644 of 2017, W.M.P. (MD) Nos. 8983, 8984 of 2017
Decided On : 08-08-2024
Writ Petition - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - The court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, acknowledging the petitioner's counsel's statement that the relief sought had become irrelevant, thus concluding that there was no need for further judicial intervention.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking to quash an order from the second respondent and to prevent future deputations to other places.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted the petitioner's counsel's endorsement that the relief sought had become infructuous, leading to the dismissal of the petition.
Issues: Whether the writ petition could be maintained given that the relief sought had become infructuous.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that if the relief sought in a writ petition is no longer relevant or necessary, the petition must be dismissed as infructuous.
Result: The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous, with no order as to costs.
ORDER :
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the impugned order passed by the second respondent in Na.Ka.No. 1925/A4/2015, dated 19.05.2017 and quash the same as illegal and consequently forbear the respondents from deputing the petitioner to any other places hereafter.
1. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the relief sought for in this Writ Petition has now become infructuous. He has also made an endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle.
2. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
A writ petition under Article 226 becomes infructuous when the relief sought is no longer relevant or necessary.
A writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable if the relief sought has become infructuous.
A writ petition becomes infructuous when the relief sought is no longer relevant or actionable.
The court has the discretion to dispose of a writ petition as infructuous based on the submissions made by the petitioner's counsel.
Legal proceedings must address current and relevant issues; if an issue becomes moot, the court will dismiss the case.
A writ petition can be dismissed for non-prosecution if the petitioner fails to appear and show interest in the case.
A petitioner has the right to withdraw a writ petition when circumstances change, such as the revocation of a suspension.
A writ petition is rendered infructuous when the circumstances surrounding the request for relief change, making it impossible to grant the requested relief.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
