A.Allah Bakash v. Corporation of Chennai
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
In the result, the writ petition stands dismissed for Non-Prosecution
Provisions considered
Judgment
W.P.No.42910 of 2016IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 04.03.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASADW.P.No.42910 of 2016andW.M.P.No.36800 of 2016A.Allah Bakash...Petitioner-Vs-1. The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Buildings, Chennai - 600 003.
The Revenue Officer, Revenue Department, Corporation of Chennai, Rippon Buildings, Chennai - 600 003.
The Zonal Officer, Zone VI, Corporation of Chennai, No.5, Anderson Road, Ayanavaram, Chennai - 600 003.
Mr.S.M.Kannan ...Respondents1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.42910 of 2016 Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 25.10.2016 given by the petitioner to the respondents with regard to gross violation of Section 279 of Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 in respect of ground floor portion premises bearing Door No.1, Babu Naicken Street, Pattalam, Chennai - 600 012 occupied by the 4th respondent and to initiate actions against the wrong doers under the Act or according to appropriate laws available. For Petitioner: No appearanceFor R1 to R3:Mr.E.C.Ramesh, Senior CounselFor R4:Mr.L.Chandrakumar********
Operative part
O R D E RWhen the matter was taken up for hearing on 03.03.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, the Registry was directed to list the matter under the caption “For Orders” on 04.03.2025.2. Even today, 04.03.2025, when the matter was taken up for hearing at 11.30 a.m., none appeared on behalf of the petitioner. It is made clear and evident that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the case.2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.42910 of 20163. Since there is no representation for the petitioner, this Court is left with no other option except to dismiss the petition for non-prosecution.4. In the result, the writ petition stands dismissed for Non-Prosecution. No costs. Consequently, connected W.M.P is closed. 04.03.2025nviIndex : Yes/NoSpeaking/Non Speaking orderTo1. The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Buildings, Chennai - 600 003.2. The Revenue Officer, Revenue Department, Corporation of Chennai, Rippon Buildings, Chennai - 600 003.3. The Zonal Officer, Zone VI, Corporation of Chennai, No.5, Anderson Road, Ayanavaram, Chennai - 600 003.3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.42910 of 2016 J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.nviW.P.No.42910 of 2016 andW.M.P.No.36800 of 201604.03.20254/4
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In the result, the writ petition stands dismissed for Non-Prosecution
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 — s. 279.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.