Madras High Court Closes Writ Petition as Infructuous After Petitioner's Counsel Submits Nothing Survives. Petitioner's challenge to office order dated 15.7.2015 became infructuous as per counsel's submission.

High Court: Madras High Court
  • 9
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Dr. Basant Kumar Tiwary, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madras High Court. He sought a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash an office order dated 15.7.2015 issued by the 2nd respondent, Pondicherry University, which allegedly violated Clause 7 of the University's Statutes. The petitioner also sought a direction to continue him as Centre Head of the Centre for Bio-Informatics till 28.2.2016 as per an earlier office order dated 28.2.2013. The respondents included the Union of India, Pondicherry University, its Vice Chancellor, and an Associate Professor. During the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner, M/s. Balan Haridas and R. Kamatchi Sundaresan, fairly submitted that nothing survives in the writ petition. Recording this submission, the court closed the writ petition as infructuous with no costs, and also closed the connected miscellaneous petition. The judgment was delivered by Justice C. Kumarappan on 05-02-2026.

Headnote

A) Writ Law - Infructuous Petition - Petitioner's counsel submitted that nothing survives in the writ petition - Court recorded the submission and closed the writ petition as infructuous - No costs (Paras 2-3)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the writ petition challenging the office order dated 15.7.2015 survives for consideration

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Writ petition closed as infructuous. No costs. Connected MP closed.

Law Points

  • Writ petition becomes infructuous when the subject matter no longer survives
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (MAD) (02) 346

WP No. 21844 of 2015

2026-02-05

C.KUMARAPPAN

2026:MHC:582

M/s.Balan Haridas, R.Kamatchi Sundaresan

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an office order of Pondicherry University

Remedy Sought

Quashing of office order dated 15.7.2015 and direction to continue petitioner as Centre Head till 28.2.2016

Filing Reason

Alleged violation of Clause 7 of the Statutes of Pondicherry University

Issues

Whether the writ petition survives for consideration

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner's counsel submitted that nothing survives in the writ petition

Ratio Decidendi

When the subject matter of a writ petition no longer survives, the petition becomes infructuous and may be closed as such.

Judgment Excerpts

The learned counsel for the petitioner would fairly submit that nothing survives in this writ petition. Recording the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition stands closed as infructuous.

Procedural History

Writ petition filed in 2015; heard on 05-02-2026; counsel submitted nothing survives; petition closed as infructuous.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Revision in Domestic Violence Case — No Domestic Relationship After Divorce. Wife's Application Under Sections 12 and 18 of Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Rejected as She Was Not Living with Husband...
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Closes Writ Petition as Infructuous After Petitioner's Counsel Submits Nothing Survives. Petitioner's challenge to office order dated 15.7.2015 became infructuous as per counsel's submission.