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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J
M.Balakrishnan – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner of Treasuries and Accounts Integrated Finance Department – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.S.C.Herold Singh
For the Respondents:Mr.Veera Kathiravan Additional Advocate General-III, Mr.A.Baskaran Additional Government Pleader for R1 & R2

O R D E R

This writ petition is listed today under the caption “for dismissal”.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner reports no instruction. This matter was listed before me on 19.09.2025 and 17.10.2025 earlier. On both occasions, learned counsel for the petitioner sought further time to argue the matter. Since this writ petition is of the year 2021, this Court had directed the Registry to list the matter under the caption “for dismissal”. Accordingly, this matter is listed today under the caption “for dismissal”. Even today, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is unable to contact the petitioner. Since this writ petition is of the year 2021, no further adjournment can be granted. It can now be inferred that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting this writ petition.

3. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are 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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top