9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 277X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the face of the record that there has not been any reference to the order dated 20.02.2012 in W.A. Nos. 2089 to 2091 of 2011 passed by the Division Bench of this Court and the contention relating to the limitation raised by the Petitioner has not even been considered. In that view of the matter, it is not possible to sustain the impugned orders, which are set aside and the matters are remitted fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nian (in all W.P.s) For the Respondents : Mr. A.N.R.Jayaprathap, Government Advocate (in all W.P.s) COMMON ORDER Heard Mr. K.Venkatasubramanian, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. A.N.R.Jayaprathap, Learned Government Advocate appearing for the Respondents and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties. 2. The Petitioner had earlier fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppropriate to grant eight weeks time to the Respondents to consider the objections filed by the appellant and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The appellant is permitted to raise all objections available to them as per law, before the Respondents for considering their case and passing appropriate orders. The Writ Appeals are disposed of accordingly. No costs. Connected Miscellane ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ennai (Order dated 08.08.2017 in W.P.No.24437 of 2004 etc., batch) in support of the said contention. 4. On a bare perusal of the impugned orders, it is apparent on the face of the record that there has not been any reference to the order dated 20.02.2012 in W.A. Nos. 2089 to 2091 of 2011 passed by the Division Bench of this Court and the contention relating to the limitation raised by the Peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
