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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 24161

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.DHANDAPANI, J
S.Arumugam – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Chennai-600 034 – Respondent
WMP NO. 12446 of 2022



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.A.E.Ravichandran
For the Respondents: Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, SGP HR & CE

A petitioner can withdraw a writ petition, leading to its dismissal under procedural rules.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Facts of the Case: The petitioner sought to quash a notice dated 23.04.2022 and direct the second respondent to pass orders on OA No.4 of 2020.

Findings of Court:
The counsel for the petitioner was not interested in proceeding with the case.

Issues: The court observed the petitioner's endorsement of non-interest in the continuation of the writ petition.

Ratio Decidendi: The case was effectively dismissed owing to the petitioner's non-interest, reflecting the procedural aspect of withdrawal of writ petitions.

Result: This Writ Petition is dismissed as not pressed.

Table of Content
1. judicial review of administrative decisions (Para 1)
2. withdrawal of petitions leads to dismissal (Para 2 , 3)

PRAYER;Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of certiorarified Mandamus,calling for the records pertaining to the Notice under reference No.Na.Ka.No.6072/2021/A5 dated 23.4.2022 of the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to pass orders on the OA No.4 of 2020 originally filed before the 3rd respondent and presently pending before the 2nd respondent within a reasonable time For Petitioner(s): Mr.A.E.Ravichandran For Respondent(s): Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, SGP HR & CE ORDER The Writ Petition has been filed seeking to quash the notice dated

23.04.2022 issued by the second respondent and consequently, direct the second respondent to pass orders on the OA No.4 of 2020 originally filed before the 3rd respondent and presently pending before the second respondent.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is not interested to proceed with the present case and hence, he is not pressing the writ petition. To that effect, he has made an endorsement in the case bundle.

3. Recording the submission and endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is dismissed as not pressed. No costs. Consequently, 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