SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

Author: Sekar Reporter

W.P.Nos.16784, 16330, 16349, 16352, 16790, 16793, 16785, 16336, 16345, 16464, 16479, 16351, 16342, 16471, 16339, 16334 & 16466 of 2022 D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. Today, when the matter was taken up, Mr.A.Manikkannan, Secretary / Chief Engineer (P)/FAC, TANGEDCO appeared before this Court and filed an affidavit. 2. On a perusal of the said affidavit, it could be seen that in the year 2019, the Board has created a new post in the nomenclature of Gangman and proceedings have been issued on 02.03.2019 and 06.03.2019 to that effect.

Uncategorized

W.P.Nos.16784, 16330, 16349, 16352, 16790, 16793, 16785, 16336, 16345, 16464, 16479, 16351, 16342, 16471, 16339, 16334 & 16466 of 2022 D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. Today, when the matter was taken up, Mr.A.Manikkannan, Secretary / Chief Engineer (P)/FAC, TANGEDCO appeared before this Court and filed an affidavit. 2. On a perusal of the said affidavit, it could be seen that in the year 2019, the Board has created a new post in the nomenclature of Gangman and proceedings have been issued on 02.03.2019 and 06.03.2019 to that effect.

W.P.Nos.16784, 16330, 16349, 16352, 16790, 16793, 16785, 16336, 16345, 16464, 16479, 16351, 16342, 16471, 16339, 16334 & 16466 of 2022 D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. Today, when the matter was taken up, Mr.A.Manikkannan, Secretary / Chief Engineer...

Appeal against acquittal in 138NI Act conform by Hon’ble Highcourt. HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN CRL.A.No.373 of 2019 and Crl.M.P.No.8084 of 2019 S.Gunasekaran … Appellant/ for rep adv kumarasamy argued

Uncategorized

Appeal against acquittal in 138NI Act conform by Hon’ble Highcourt. HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN CRL.A.No.373 of 2019 and Crl.M.P.No.8084 of 2019 S.Gunasekaran … Appellant/ for rep adv kumarasamy argued

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS RESERVED ON :05.08.2021 PRONOUNCED ON: 15.12.2021 CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN CRL.A.No.373 of 2019 and Crl.M.P.No.8084 of 2019 S.Gunasekaran … Appellant/Respondent/ Complainant Vs. Santhi … Respondent/Appellant/...

HONOURABLE JUSTICE MR.N.ANAND VENKATESH W.P.Nos.19342, 19343 and 19344 of 2013 and MP.No.1,1,1 of 2013 V.Krishnamurthy Proprietor: M/s.Meena Advertisers .In the result, all the Writ Petitions stand dismissed and the petitioner is directed to pay a cost of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) to the Chief Justice Relief Fund within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. For Petitioners : Mr.G.Rajagopalan (in All WPs) Senior Counsel for M/s.G.R.Associates For Respondents : Mr.U.Arun (in All WPs) Additional Advocate General Asst.by: Mr.R.Kumaravel Additional Government Pleader

Uncategorized

HONOURABLE JUSTICE MR.N.ANAND VENKATESH W.P.Nos.19342, 19343 and 19344 of 2013 and MP.No.1,1,1 of 2013 V.Krishnamurthy Proprietor: M/s.Meena Advertisers .In the result, all the Writ Petitions stand dismissed and the petitioner is directed to pay a cost of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) to the Chief Justice Relief Fund within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. For Petitioners : Mr.G.Rajagopalan (in All WPs) Senior Counsel for M/s.G.R.Associates For Respondents : Mr.U.Arun (in All WPs) Additional Advocate General Asst.by: Mr.R.Kumaravel Additional Government Pleader

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS ORDERS RESERVED ON : 29.06.2022 PRONOUNCING ORDERS ON : 04.07.2022 Coram: THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE MR.N.ANAND VENKATESH W.P.Nos.19342, 19343 and 19344 of 2013 and MP.No.1,1,1 of 2013...

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Judgment Reserved on : 29.06.2022 Judgment Pronounced on : 06.07.2022 CORAM : THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Crl.A.No.394 of 2022 For Appellant : Mr.A.Ramesh, Senior Counsel for Mr.C.Arun Kumar For Respondent : Mr.A.R.L.Sundaresan, Senior Counsel for Mr.M.Mohammed Rafi for RR-1 to 3 : Mr.V.Balasubramanian, R6 : Notice served for RR-4, 5, 7 and 8 JUDGMENT

Uncategorized

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Judgment Reserved on : 29.06.2022 Judgment Pronounced on : 06.07.2022 CORAM : THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Crl.A.No.394 of 2022 For Appellant : Mr.A.Ramesh, Senior Counsel for Mr.C.Arun Kumar For Respondent : Mr.A.R.L.Sundaresan, Senior Counsel for Mr.M.Mohammed Rafi for RR-1 to 3 : Mr.V.Balasubramanian, R6 : Notice served for RR-4, 5, 7 and 8 JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Judgment Reserved on : 29.06.2022 Judgment Pronounced on : 06.07.2022 CORAM : THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Crl.A.No.394 of 2022 S.Srinivasan .. Appellant Versus 1. M/s....

அரசு உதவிபெறும் தனியார் பள்ளியில் ஆசிரியராக பணிபுரிந்து, ராஜினாமா செய்து பணியிலிருந்து விலகிய பின், அரசுப் பள்ளியில் ஆசிரியராக பணி நியமனம் பெற்ற ஆசிரியரின், முந்தைய பணிக்காலத்தை பணிப்பயன்களுக்காக கணக்கில் எடுத்துக்கொள்ள முடியாது.* *மாண்புமிகு சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்ற நீதிபதி எஸ்.எம்.சுப்ரமணியம் தீர்ப்பு.*

Uncategorized

அரசு உதவிபெறும் தனியார் பள்ளியில் ஆசிரியராக பணிபுரிந்து, ராஜினாமா செய்து பணியிலிருந்து விலகிய பின், அரசுப் பள்ளியில் ஆசிரியராக பணி நியமனம் பெற்ற ஆசிரியரின், முந்தைய பணிக்காலத்தை பணிப்பயன்களுக்காக கணக்கில் எடுத்துக்கொள்ள முடியாது.* *மாண்புமிகு சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்ற நீதிபதி எஸ்.எம்.சுப்ரமணியம் தீர்ப்பு.*

[7/8, 12:54] Sekarreporter: *அரசு உதவிபெறும் தனியார் பள்ளியில் ஆசிரியராக பணிபுரிந்து, ராஜினாமா செய்து பணியிலிருந்து விலகிய பின், அரசுப் பள்ளியில் ஆசிரியராக பணி நியமனம் பெற்ற ஆசிரியரின், முந்தைய பணிக்காலத்தை பணிப்பயன்களுக்காக கணக்கில் எடுத்துக்கொள்ள முடியாது.* *மாண்புமிகு சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்ற நீதிபதி எஸ்.எம்.சுப்ரமணியம் தீர்ப்பு.*...

Appeal filed by Mr.Mukunchand Bothra against Mr.Krishnamurthy @karturiraja on the basis of bounced cheque for some of Rs.65 lakh. Originally, he has filed private complaint where acquittal order with observations that there is no income proof produced by Mr.Mukunchand Bothra for alleged period as he rendered 65 Lakh to Mr.kasturiraja.

Uncategorized

Appeal filed by Mr.Mukunchand Bothra against Mr.Krishnamurthy @karturiraja on the basis of bounced cheque for some of Rs.65 lakh. Originally, he has filed private complaint where acquittal order with observations that there is no income proof produced by Mr.Mukunchand Bothra for alleged period as he rendered 65 Lakh to Mr.kasturiraja.

[7/8, 06:57] Sekarreporter: https://wwwsekarreporter.wordpress.com/2022/07/08/appeal-against-kasthuriraja-dismissed-for-kasthuriraja-counsel-haja-mohitheen-gisthy-https-t-co-s9a4aslvkg/ [7/8, 06:57] Sekarreporter: Appeal filed by Mr.Mukunchand Bothra against Mr.Krishnamurthy @karturiraja on the basis of bounced cheque for some of Rs.65 lakh. Originally, he has filed private complaint where acquittal...

W.P.No.16704 of 2022 and WMP.No.16013 of 2022 D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. Today when the matter is taken up, the second respondent/Commissioner of School Education, Chennai-6, who is present before this Court, has filed a report before this Court along with a Tabulation Chart This Court, in continuation to the earlier order passed by this Court dated 01.07.2022, makes it clear that applications in respect of teachers who possess the qualification of pass in TET alone be processed. 3. At the request of the learned Advocate General list the matter on 15.07.2022 at 2.15 p.m. 07.07.2022 Jvm D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. Jvm

Uncategorized

W.P.No.16704 of 2022 and WMP.No.16013 of 2022 D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. Today when the matter is taken up, the second respondent/Commissioner of School Education, Chennai-6, who is present before this Court, has filed a report before this Court along with a Tabulation Chart This Court, in continuation to the earlier order passed by this Court dated 01.07.2022, makes it clear that applications in respect of teachers who possess the qualification of pass in TET alone be processed. 3. At the request of the learned Advocate General list the matter on 15.07.2022 at 2.15 p.m. 07.07.2022 Jvm D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. Jvm

[7/7, 22:41] Sekarreporter: W.P.No.16704 of 2022 and WMP.No.16013 of 2022 D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. Today when the matter is taken up, the second respondent/Commissioner of School Education, Chennai-6, who is present before this Court, has filed...

Teachers appointment full order Sekarreporter: W.P.No.12584 of 2022 and WMP.Nos.12037 &12038 of 2022 D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to implement the amendment to Rule 3 of the Tamil Nadu School Education Subordinate Services vide G.O.Ms.No.7, School Education Department dated 20.01.2020 by taking into account

Uncategorized

Teachers appointment full order Sekarreporter: W.P.No.12584 of 2022 and WMP.Nos.12037 &12038 of 2022 D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to implement the amendment to Rule 3 of the Tamil Nadu School Education Subordinate Services vide G.O.Ms.No.7, School Education Department dated 20.01.2020 by taking into account

[7/7, 22:42] Sekarreporter: W.P.No.12584 of 2022 and WMP.Nos.12037 &12038 of 2022 D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to implement the amendment to Rule 3 of...

Today the Hon’ble High Court of Madras heard the matter in relation to police protection sought by renowned senior advocate and mediator Mr Sriram Panchu. The matter was heard by Hon’ble Mr Justice Satish Kumar. The petitioner Mr Sriram Panchu was represented by learned senior counsel Mr S Prabakaran, the learned senior counsel vehemently contended that the Z category protection was granted to the petitioner on the basis of the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order in Ramjanmabhomi case as the petitioner Mr Sriram Panchu was appointed as one of the mediators in the mediation ordered by the Hon’ble Apex Court and further contended that the prevailing situation in regards with gyanvapi mosque or mathura issue has raised serious threat to the petitioners life as the start point for these issues were the Ayodhya case

Uncategorized

Today the Hon’ble High Court of Madras heard the matter in relation to police protection sought by renowned senior advocate and mediator Mr Sriram Panchu. The matter was heard by Hon’ble Mr Justice Satish Kumar. The petitioner Mr Sriram Panchu was represented by learned senior counsel Mr S Prabakaran, the learned senior counsel vehemently contended that the Z category protection was granted to the petitioner on the basis of the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order in Ramjanmabhomi case as the petitioner Mr Sriram Panchu was appointed as one of the mediators in the mediation ordered by the Hon’ble Apex Court and further contended that the prevailing situation in regards with gyanvapi mosque or mathura issue has raised serious threat to the petitioners life as the start point for these issues were the Ayodhya case

[7/7, 18:57] Sekarreporter: https://twitter.com/sekarreporter1/status/1545036506938904577?t=DC25M-IsPIu_GpEW-Ys4xg&s=08 [7/7, 19:03] Sekarreporter: Today the Hon’ble High Court of Madras heard the matter in relation to police protection sought by renowned senior advocate and mediator Mr Sriram Panchu. The matter...