Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 46440
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.R. Swaminathan, R. Poornima, JJ
Ananthamurugan – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
W.P(MD) No.16926 of 2020|W.M.P.(MD)No.14168 of 2020
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: A.Kannan
For the Respondents: G.V.Vairam Santhosh, T.S.Mohammed Mohideen
For the Appellants/Petitioners: A.Kannan
For the Respondents: G.V.Vairam Santhosh, T.S.Mohammed Mohideen
When the grievances raised in a writ petition, specifically regarding infrastructure development, are satisfied or redressed through subsequent executive action, the court may dispose of the petition as infructuous.
Headnote:The petitioner filed a writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a mandamus to enforce a Government Order for the construction of additional law chambers at the High Court and for the regulation of existing chamber allotments. The court observed that the grievance had been redressed as the additional chambers were subsequently constructed. The main issue involved the implementation of infrastructure development and the regulation of chamber allotment among practicing advocates. The court, noting the fulfillment of the construction objectives, determined that the petition had become infructuous. The writ petition was disposed of as the relief sought was granted by the completion of the construction work.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. redressal of grievances leads to disposal of writ petitions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
(Order of the Court was made by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.)
Heard both sides.
2. The petitioner's grievance has already been redressed. The additional chambers have been built for the lawyers practicing before the Madurai Bench.
3. Recording the subsequent development, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
