M INGACI Vs. COMMISSIONER DEVEKOTTAI MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Writ Petition of the writ Petitioner/Appellant was allowed but yet, he is aggrieved. According to him, certain factors were not taken note of, by the learned single Judge, which has resulted in directions being issued to the first Respondent.

(2.) The Appellant is running a cement sales shop. It is evident from the typedset of papers that he is not allowed one moment of peace because of the fifth Respondent.

(3.) The fifth Respondent filed several Writ Petitions and finally, by order dated 17.3.2007 in Writ Petition (MD) No. 10799 of 2006, he was severely reprimanded by the Division Bench. Perhaps, sensing the mood of the Court, the fifth Respondent, who was the Petitioner there sought permission to withdraw the Writ Petition. While dismissing the Writ Petition as withdrawn, the Division Bench observed as follows: