Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 1504 (MAD)

E. Prathesh Kumar v. Commissioner Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation

2012-03-27

M.JAICHANDREN

body2012
Judgment :- 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. By consent of both the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if the first respondent is directed to consider the application of the petitioner, dated 14.9.2011, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court. 5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side, the first respondent is directed to consider the application of the petitioner, dated 14.9.2011, if it is in order, and pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, it is made clear that this Court, by this order, has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. The writ petition is disposed of, with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.