Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 40603
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M Dhandapani, J
P.MUTHAN PERUMAL – Appellant
Versus
THE SECRETARY – Respondent
WP No.27558 of 2023 and WMP No.27004 of 2023
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.V.Srikanth
For the Respondents: Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan for R1 to R4 & R10 Special Government Pleader Mr.D.Raghu for R5 to R9
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.V.Srikanth
For the Respondents: Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan for R1 to R4 & R10 Special Government Pleader Mr.D.Raghu for R5 to R9
Where tenure period of trustees expires during pendency, writ petition becomes infructuous and is liable to be dismissed.
Headnote:Statute Analysis: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India. Facts of the Case: Petition challenging the appointment of non-hereditary trustees and G.O.No.191.
Findings of Court:
Tenure of two years has already expired during pendency of petition.
Issues: Whether the writ petition survives for adjudication after tenure expiry.
Ratio Decidendi: Court held that nothing remains for adjudication as main grievance stands resolved.
Result: Writ petition dismissed as infructuous granting liberty to petitioner.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition dismissed as infructuous due to lapse of tenure. (Para 1 , 2) |
ORDER
The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the present writ petition has been filed challenging the appointment of non-hereditary trustees. However, during the pendency of the writ petition, the tenure of two years has already expired. Therefore, nothing survives for further adjudication in this writ petition.
2.Recording the said submission, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
