Back
Next 
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
Important Points
Writ petition dismissed due to repeated non-representation by petitioner.
Subject
Civil - Service/Pension
Act Referred
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.
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
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
| 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.
