Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 29616

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T. VINOD KUMAR, J
K.Narayanasamy – Appellant
Versus
The Govt of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary to Transport Department – Respondent
No 31049/Onathapil/Mapoka/2018

Advocates:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr.A.Rajaram
For Respondents: Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal for R1 Additional Government Pleader, Mr. A.Vinothraj for R2 Standing Counsel

Writ petition dismissed due to repeated non-representation by petitioner.

Headnote:First Paragraph: The petitioner challenged an order dated 14-12-2018 denying pension under Article 226, seeking certiorari and mandamus. Court found repeated non-representation by petitioner on listing dates. Court determined lack of interest in pursuing the matter. Second Paragraph: Issue framed as whether writ petition should proceed without representation. Ratio: Absence of counsel on multiple dates indicates non-prosecution. Third Paragraph: Writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.

Table of Content
1. no petitioner representation on multiple dates. (Para 1 , 2)

ORDER

Despite the matter being listed on 26.11.2025 and 10.12.2025, there was no representation for the petitioner.

2. Even today (30.03.2026) when the matter is listed under the caption 'for dismissal', there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, which only goes to show that the petitioner is not interested to pursue the matter.

3. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document