IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19-11-2007 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition Nos.8610 to 8620 of 1999 and Writ Petition Nos. 8445 to 8453 of 1999 Raju .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8610 of 1999 Abdul Khader .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8611 of 1999 Sathya Seelan .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8612 of 1999 Subramanian .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8613 of 1999 Sundaram. D .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8614 of 1999 Manoharan .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8615 of 1999 S.A.P.Amalraj .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8616 of 1999 P.V.Ibrahim .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8617 of 1999 M.Mohideen .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8618 of 1999 Krishnan .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8619 of 1999 K.A.S.Ramadoss .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8620 of 1999 Seethaiammal .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8445 of 1999 K.K.Balasubramanian .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8446 of 1999 Rajamanikantan .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8447 of 1999 Veniammal .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8448 of 1999 Ganesan .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8449 of 1999 Zakirhussain .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8450 of 1999 S.Rajendran .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8451 of 1999 P.Rajalingam .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8452 of 1999 Jayesh Kumar .. Petitioner in W.P.No.8453 of 1999 Versus 1.The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary to Govt. Rural Development, Local Administration Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9. 2.The Municipal Corporation Council The Corporation of Trichirappalli. Rep. by its Commissioner, Trichy. .. Respondents. Prayer in W.P.Nos.8610 to 8620 and W.P.Nos.8445 to 8453 of 1999: These writ petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Declaration, declaring that G.O.Ms.No.67 Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 2.3.99 issued by Govt. of Tamil https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Nadu Rural Development and Local Administration Department is without authority of law, illegal and violating of Articles 14 and 19(i)(g) of the Constitution of India in so far as the petitioners are concerned. For petitioners : Mr.S.Prabakaran For Respondents : Mr.V.Manoharan Government Advocate (R1) Mr.P.Srinivas (R2) C O M M O N O R D E R The writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners challenging G.O.Ms.No.67 issued by the Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 2.3.1999, and the consequential proceedings issued by the respondents based on the said Government order as being illegal and ultravires the constitution of India. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsels appearing for the respondents that the impugned G.O.Ms.No.67 of the Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 2.3.99, issued by Govt. of Tamil Nadu Rural Development and Local Administration Department had been subsequently, superceded by the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.165 of the Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 29.6.2004. It has also been submitted by the learned counsels appearing for the respondents that G.O.Ms.No.92, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 03.07.2007 has also been issued subsequently. 3. It has also been pointed out that in similar circumstances, this Court had passed an order, dated 9.3.2007, in W.P.No.9158 of 1999, which reads as follows: "The prayer made in the writ petition is to declare G.O.Ms.No.67, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 02.3.1999 issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu Rural Development and Local Administration Department is without authority, of law illegal and violative of Article 14 and 19 (i) (g) of the Constitution of India in so far as the petitioner is concerned. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that during the pendency of the writ petition, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.165, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 29.6.2004 granting permission to transfer the lease in favour of the legal representatives and also https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ transfer made prior to the date of G.O.Ms.No.67, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 2.3.1999. Hence, the prayer made in the writ petition has become infructuous. The same view has been taken in batch of writ petitions in W.P.No.6359 to 6368 of 1999 etc., batch, dated 29.7.1999. 3. Hence, the writ petition has become infructuous. No costs" 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has not controverted the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 5. In view of the above, these writ petitions have become infructuous. Hence, the writ petitions are dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Sd/- Asst. Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar. csh To 1. The Secretary to Govt. Rural Development, The State of Tamil Nadu Local Administration Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9. 2.The Commissioner Municipal Corporation Council The Corporation of Trichirappalli. Trichy. 1 cc to Mr.P. Srinivas, Advocate, Sr,. 68285 1 cc to Mr.M.S. Palaniswamy, Advocate, Sr. 68109 1 cc to Government Pleader, SR. 68432 Writ Petition Nos.8610 to 8620 of 1999 and Writ Petition Nos. 8445 to 8453 of 1999 SJ (CO) kk /12 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/