Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J
M.Sekar – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector Office Of Collector, Tirupur District. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. proceeding filed for bar license; no representation leads to case being dropped. (Para 1) |
| 2. court's decision to dismiss based on non-prosecution. (Para 2) |
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to issue an order to grant bar licence in favour of the petitioner as H2 bidder to carry out business in the bar attached tot he TASMAC Retail Shop No. 1513 in view of the Cancellation notification order passed in Na.Ka. 199/A3/2024 dated March
16,2024 on the file of the 3rd respondent herein, For Petitioner(s): Mr.P.Kalimuthu (No appearance)
For Respondent(s): Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan Special Government Pleader for R1 MR.M.SEKAR STANDING COUNSEL FOR RR2 & 3
ORDER
When the case was taken up for hearing on 03.03.2026 there was no representation for the petitioner, therefore, it was directed to be listed on
06.03.2026 under the caption 'for dismissal'.
2. Today also when the case is called, there is no representation for the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.
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
