1.2 Notice to the respondent was dispensed with, as the respondent had not yet been summoned by the Trial Court.

2 A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Ld. Trial Court declined to take cognizance of the complaint primarily for the reason that the complainant despite availing several opportunities had not filed the ECS mandate. Further the account statement filed did not bear any stamp and was not even signed. Therefore, noticing that several opportunities have already been afforded to the complainant, the complaint was dismissed. 3 Sh.Anish Bhola, counsel for the petitioner has assailed the CR No.-97/2020 Page No.-1 of 4 impugned Order on the ground that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in observing that the ECS mandate was not on record. It is pointed out that the petitioner/ complainant along with the complaint had placed on record a ' Debit Authorization Form issued by the customer" i.e. the respondent to the petitioner bank. It is argued that the Debit Authorization Form is akin to ECS mandate. . To link the Debit Authorization Form with the loan agreement involved, an account statement was placed on record. The petitioner/complainant had also placed on record along with the complaint a memorandum issued by the bank, intimating return of the mandate on account of insufficiency of funds. Sh.Bhola has, further, argued that the offence as envisaged u/sec.-25 of the Payments & Settlement Systems Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the PSS Act') was completed, when the respondent, who had taken a loan and had issued authorization to debit the amount each month from his account failed to maintain sufficient balance in his account, thereby, resulting in failure of debit of amount. It is, therefore, argued that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in dismissing the complaint as both the documents constituting the offence were on record.

1.2 Notice to the respondent was dispensed with, as the respondent had not yet been summoned by the Trial Court.

2 A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Ld. Trial Court declined to take cognizance of the complaint primarily for the reason that the complainant despite availing several opportunities had not filed the ECS mandate. Further the account statement filed did not bear any stamp and was not even signed. Therefore, noticing that several opportunities have already been afforded to the complainant, the complaint was dismissed. 3 Sh.Anish Bhola, counsel for the petitioner has assailed the CR No.-95/2020 Page No.-1 of 4 impugned Order on the ground that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in observing that the ECS mandate was not on record. It is pointed out that the petitioner/ complainant along with the complaint had placed on record a ' Debit Authorization Form issued by the customer" i.e. the respondent to the petitioner bank. It is argued that the Debit Authorization Form is akin to ECS mandate. . To link the Debit Authorization Form with the loan agreement involved, an account statement was placed on record. The petitioner/complainant had also placed on record along with the complaint a memorandum issued by the bank, intimating return of the mandate on account of insufficiency of funds. Sh.Bhola has, further, argued that the offence as envisaged u/sec.-25 of the Payments & Settlement Systems Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the PSS Act') was completed, when the respondent, who had taken a loan and had issued authorization to debit the amount each month from his account failed to maintain sufficient balance in his account, thereby, resulting in failure of debit of amount. It is, therefore, argued that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in dismissing the complaint as both the documents constituting the offence were on record.

1.2 Notice to the respondent was dispensed with, as the respondent had not yet been summoned by the Trial Court.

2 A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Ld. Trial Court declined to take cognizance of the complaint primarily for the reason that the complainant despite availing several opportunities had not filed the ECS mandate. Further the account statement filed did not bear any stamp and was not even signed. Therefore, noticing that several opportunities have already been afforded to the complainant, the complaint was dismissed. 3 Sh.Anish Bhola, counsel for the petitioner has assailed the CR No.-86/2020 Page No.-1 of 4 impugned Order on the ground that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in observing that the ECS mandate was not on record. It is pointed out that the petitioner/ complainant along with the complaint had placed on record a ' Debit Authorization Form issued by the customer" i.e. the respondent to the petitioner bank. It is argued that the Debit Authorization Form is akin to ECS mandate. . To link the Debit Authorization Form with the loan agreement involved, an account statement was placed on record. The petitioner/complainant had also placed on record along with the complaint a memorandum issued by the bank, intimating return of the mandate on account of insufficiency of funds. Sh.Bhola has, further, argued that the offence as envisaged u/sec.-25 of the Payments & Settlement Systems Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the PSS Act') was completed, when the respondent, who had taken a loan and had issued authorization to debit the amount each month from his account failed to maintain sufficient balance in his account, thereby, resulting in failure of debit of amount. It is, therefore, argued that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in dismissing the complaint as both the documents constituting the offence were on record.

1.2 Notice to the respondent was dispensed with, as the respondent had not yet been summoned by the Trial Court.

2 A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Ld. Trial Court declined to take cognizance of the complaint primarily for the reason that the complainant despite availing several opportunities had not filed the ECS mandate. Further the account statement filed did not bear any stamp and was not even signed. Therefore, noticing that several opportunities have already been afforded to the complainant, the complaint was dismissed. 3 Sh.Anish Bhola, counsel for the petitioner has assailed the CR No.-88/2020 Page No.-1 of 3 impugned Order on the ground that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in observing that the ECS mandate was not on record. It is pointed out that the petitioner/ complainant along with the complaint had placed on record a ' Debit Authorization Form issued by the customer" i.e. the respondent to the petitioner bank. It is argued that the Debit Authorization Form is akin to ECS mandate. The petitioner/complainant had also placed on record along with the complaint a memorandum issued by the bank, noticing return of the mandate on account of insufficiency of funds. Sh.Bhola has, further, argued that the offence as envisaged u/sec.-25 of the Payments & Settlement Systems Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the PSS Act') was completed, when the respondent, who had taken a loan and had issued authorization to debit the amount each month from his account failed to maintain sufficient balance in his account, thereby, resulting in failure of debit of amount. It is, therefore, argued that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in dismissing the complaint as both the documents constituting the offence were on record.

1.2 Notice to the respondent was dispensed with, as the respondent had not yet been summoned by the Trial Court.

2 A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Ld. Trial Court declined to take cognizance of the complaint primarily for the reason that the complainant despite availing several opportunities had not filed the ECS mandate. Further the account statement filed did not bear any stamp and was not even signed. Therefore, noticing that several opportunities have already been afforded to the complainant, the complaint was dismissed.

CR No.-84/2020 Page No.-1 of 3

3 Sh.Anish Bhola, counsel for the petitioner has assailed the impugned Order on the ground that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in observing that the ECS mandate was not on record. It is pointed out that the petitioner/ complainant along with the complaint had placed on record a ' Debit Authorization Form issued by the customer" i.e. the respondent to the petitioner bank. It is argued that the Debit Authorization Form is akin to ECS mandate. The petitioner/complainant had also placed on record along with the complaint a memorandum issued by the bank, noticing return of the mandate on account of insufficiency of funds. Sh.Bhola has, further, argued that the offence as envisaged u/sec.-25 of the Payments & Settlement Systems Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the PSS Act') was completed, when the respondent, who had taken a loan and had issued authorization to debit the amount each month from his account failed to maintain sufficient balance in his account, thereby, resulting in failure of debit of amount. It is, therefore, argued that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in dismissing the complaint as both the documents constituting the offence were on record.

1.2 Notice to the respondent was dispensed with, as the respondent had not yet been summoned by the Trial Court.

2 A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Ld. Trial Court declined to take cognizance of the complaint primarily for the reason that the complainant despite availing several opportunities had not filed the ECS mandate. Further the account statement filed did not bear any stamp and was not even signed. Therefore, noticing that several opportunities have already been afforded to the complainant, the complaint was dismissed. 3 Sh.Anish Bhola, counsel for the petitioner has assailed the CR No.-93/2020 Page No.-1 of 4 impugned Order on the ground that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in observing that the ECS mandate was not on record. It is pointed out that the petitioner/ complainant along with the complaint had placed on record a ' Debit Authorization Form issued by the customer" i.e. the respondent to the petitioner bank. It is argued that the Debit Authorization Form is akin to ECS mandate. . To link the Debit Authorization Form with the loan agreement involved, an account statement was placed on record. The petitioner/complainant had also placed on record along with the complaint a memorandum issued by the bank, intimating return of the mandate on account of insufficiency of funds. Sh.Bhola has, further, argued that the offence as envisaged u/sec.-25 of the Payments & Settlement Systems Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the PSS Act') was completed, when the respondent, who had taken a loan and had issued authorization to debit the amount each month from his account failed to maintain sufficient balance in his account, thereby, resulting in failure of debit of amount. It is, therefore, argued that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in dismissing the complaint as both the documents constituting the offence were on record.

1.2 Notice to the respondent was dispensed with, as the respondent had not yet been summoned by the Trial Court.

2 A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Ld. Trial Court declined to take cognizance of the complaint primarily for the reason that the complainant despite availing several opportunities had not filed the ECS mandate. Further the account statement filed did not bear any stamp and was not even signed. Therefore, noticing that several opportunities have already been afforded to the complainant, the complaint was dismissed. 3 Sh.Anish Bhola, counsel for the petitioner has assailed the CR No.-87/2020 Page No.-1 of 3 impugned Order on the ground that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in observing that the ECS mandate was not on record. It is pointed out that the petitioner/ complainant along with the complaint had placed on record a ' Debit Authorization Form issued by the customer" i.e. the respondent to the petitioner bank. It is argued that the Debit Authorization Form is akin to ECS mandate. The petitioner/complainant had also placed on record along with the complaint a memorandum issued by the bank, noticing return of the mandate on account of insufficiency of funds. Sh.Bhola has, further, argued that the offence as envisaged u/sec.-25 of the Payments & Settlement Systems Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the PSS Act') was completed, when the respondent, who had taken a loan and had issued authorization to debit the amount each month from his account failed to maintain sufficient balance in his account, thereby, resulting in failure of debit of amount. It is, therefore, argued that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in dismissing the complaint as both the documents constituting the offence were on record.

1.2 Notice to the respondent was dispensed with, as the respondent had not yet been summoned by the Trial Court.

2 A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Ld. Trial Court declined to take cognizance of the complaint primarily for the reason that the complainant despite availing several opportunities had not filed the ECS mandate. Further the account statement filed did not bear any stamp and was not even signed. Therefore, noticing that several opportunities have already been afforded to the complainant, the complaint was dismissed. 3 Sh.Anish Bhola, counsel for the petitioner has assailed the CR No.-85/2020 Page No.-1 of 4 impugned Order on the ground that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in observing that the ECS mandate was not on record. It is pointed out that the petitioner/ complainant along with the complaint had placed on record a ' Debit Authorization Form issued by the customer" i.e. the respondent to the petitioner bank. It is argued that the Debit Authorization Form is akin to ECS mandate. . To link the Debit Authorization Form with the loan agreement involved, an account statement was placed on record. The petitioner/complainant had also placed on record along with the complaint a memorandum issued by the bank, intimating return of the mandate on account of insufficiency of funds. Sh.Bhola has, further, argued that the offence as envisaged u/sec.-25 of the Payments & Settlement Systems Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the PSS Act') was completed, when the respondent, who had taken a loan and had issued authorization to debit the amount each month from his account failed to maintain sufficient balance in his account, thereby, resulting in failure of debit of amount. It is, therefore, argued that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in dismissing the complaint as both the documents constituting the offence were on record.

1.2 Notice to the respondent was dispensed with, as the respondent had not yet been summoned by the Trial Court.

2 A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Ld. Trial Court declined to take cognizance of the complaint primarily for the reason that the complainant despite availing several opportunities had not filed the ECS mandate. Further the account statement filed did not bear any stamp and was not even signed. Therefore, noticing that several opportunities have already been afforded to the complainant, the complaint was dismissed. 3 Sh.Anish Bhola, counsel for the petitioner has assailed the CR No.-91/2020 Page No.-1 of 4 impugned Order on the ground that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in observing that the ECS mandate was not on record. It is pointed out that the petitioner/ complainant along with the complaint had placed on record a ' Debit Authorization Form issued by the customer" i.e. the respondent to the petitioner bank. It is argued that the Debit Authorization Form is akin to ECS mandate. . To link the Debit Authorization Form with the loan agreement involved, an account statement was placed on record. The petitioner/complainant had also placed on record along with the complaint a memorandum issued by the bank, intimating return of the mandate on account of insufficiency of funds. Sh.Bhola has, further, argued that the offence as envisaged u/sec.-25 of the Payments & Settlement Systems Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the PSS Act') was completed, when the respondent, who had taken a loan and had issued authorization to debit the amount each month from his account failed to maintain sufficient balance in his account, thereby, resulting in failure of debit of amount. It is, therefore, argued that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in dismissing the complaint as both the documents constituting the offence were on record.

1.2 Notice to the respondent was dispensed with, as the respondent had not yet been summoned by the Trial Court.

2 A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Ld. Trial Court declined to take cognizance of the complaint primarily for the reason that the complainant despite availing several opportunities had not filed the ECS mandate. Further the account statement filed did not bear any stamp and was not even signed. Therefore, noticing that several opportunities have already been afforded to the complainant, the complaint was dismissed. 3 Sh.Anish Bhola, counsel for the petitioner has assailed the CR No.-89/2020 Page No.-1 of 4 impugned Order on the ground that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in observing that the ECS mandate was not on record. It is pointed out that the petitioner/ complainant along with the complaint had placed on record a ' Debit Authorization Form issued by the customer" i.e. the respondent to the petitioner bank. It is argued that the Debit Authorization Form is akin to ECS mandate. . To link the Debit Authorization Form with the loan agreement involved, an account statement was placed on record. The petitioner/complainant had also placed on record along with the complaint a memorandum issued by the bank, intimating return of the mandate on account of insufficiency of funds. Sh.Bhola has, further, argued that the offence as envisaged u/sec.-25 of the Payments & Settlement Systems Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the PSS Act') was completed, when the respondent, who had taken a loan and had issued authorization to debit the amount each month from his account failed to maintain sufficient balance in his account, thereby, resulting in failure of debit of amount. It is, therefore, argued that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in dismissing the complaint as both the documents constituting the offence were on record.

1.2 Notice to the respondent was dispensed with, as the respondent had not yet been summoned by the Trial Court.

2 A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Ld. Trial Court declined to take cognizance of the complaint primarily for the reason that the complainant despite availing several opportunities had not filed the ECS mandate. Further the account statement filed did not bear any stamp and was not even signed. Therefore, noticing that several opportunities have already been afforded to the complainant, the complaint was dismissed. 3 Sh.Anish Bhola, counsel for the petitioner has assailed the CR No.-83/2020 Page No.-1 of 4 impugned Order on the ground that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in observing that the ECS mandate was not on record. It is pointed out that the petitioner/ complainant along with the complaint had placed on record a ' Debit Authorization Form issued by the customer" i.e. the respondent to the petitioner bank. It is argued that the Debit Authorization Form is akin to ECS mandate. . To link the Debit Authorization Form with the loan agreement involved, an account statement was placed on record. The petitioner/complainant had also placed on record along with the complaint a memorandum issued by the bank, intimating return of the mandate on account of insufficiency of funds. Sh.Bhola has, further, argued that the offence as envisaged u/sec.-25 of the Payments & Settlement Systems Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the PSS Act') was completed, when the respondent, who had taken a loan and had issued authorization to debit the amount each month from his account failed to maintain sufficient balance in his account, thereby, resulting in failure of debit of amount. It is, therefore, argued that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in dismissing the complaint as both the documents constituting the offence were on record.

1.2 Notice to the respondent was dispensed with, as the respondent had not yet been summoned by the Trial Court.

2 A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Ld. Trial Court declined to take cognizance of the complaint primarily for the reason that the complainant despite availing several opportunities had not filed the ECS mandate. Further the account statement filed did not bear any stamp and was not even signed. Therefore, noticing that several opportunities have already been afforded to the complainant, the complaint was dismissed. 3 Sh.Anish Bhola, counsel for the petitioner has assailed the CR No.-78/2020 Page No.-1 of 3 impugned Order on the ground that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in observing that the ECS mandate was not on record. It is pointed out that the petitioner/ complainant along with the complaint had placed on record a ' Debit Authorization Form issued by the customer" i.e. the respondent to the petitioner bank. It is argued that the Debit Authorization Form is akin to ECS mandate. The petitioner/complainant had also placed on record along with the complaint a memorandum issued by the bank, noticing return of the mandate on account of insufficiency of funds. Sh.Bhola has, further, argued that the offence as envisaged u/sec.-25 of the Payments & Settlement Systems Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the PSS Act') was completed, when the respondent, who had taken a loan and had issued authorization to debit the amount each month from his account failed to maintain sufficient balance in his account, thereby, resulting in failure of debit of amount. It is, therefore, argued that the Ld. MM committed a grave error in dismissing the complaint as both the documents constituting the offence were on record.

1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit against the defendant for recovery of Rs. 2,72,858/­. The brief facts of the present case are as under :­ 1.1 That the plaintiff is the proprietor of M/s S.K. Enterprises and doing the business of government electrical contractor since 1995.

1.2 That defendant No. 2 is known to the plaintiff for more than 20 years and defendant No. 2 was running his business of sale of electrical goods as proprietor/partner of defendant No. 1 for the last 7/8 years from the aforesaid address and presently doing the business from the top floor of the aforesaid address.

1.3 That in the first week of March, 2015 defendant No. 2 had requested for a friendly loan of Rs. 2,50,000/­ from the plaintiff for some urgent business need for one week and considering the old friendship with defendant no. 2, the plaintiff had agreed to give a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/­ to the defendants but defendant No. 2 was insisting to increase the amount from Rs. 2,00,000/­ and accordingly, the plaintiff had agreed to give Rs. 2,01,000/­ to the defendants as a friendly loan for one week to the defendant and transferred an amount of Rs. 2,01,000/­ on 09.03.2015 by RTGS No. 17673 from the account of his firm M/s S.K. Enterprises Page 2 of 10 bearing No. 034902000001291 with Indian Overseas Bank, Roop Nagar, Delhi to the account of defendant No. 1 bearing No. 914020024386296 with Axis Bank, Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi having IFSC code No. UTIB0001838.

2. The case of the plaintiff as disclosed from the plaint is that the plaintiff is engaged in the business of providing internet services under licence from Department of Telecommunications, Ministry of Communications & Information Technology. The defendants approached the plaintiff for taking internet services and after negotiations the plaintiff agreed to provide services to a defendant and thereafter the plaintiff and the defendant signed customer application form (CAF) on 04.04.2015. The plaintiff provided the internet services to a defendant No. 1 company on monthly basis and after providing the services, the plaintiff raised bill of Rs.27,54193/­ and out of the said amount the defendants paid a sum of Rs. 22,08,000/­ and the balance sum of Rs. 5,46,193/­ is outstanding and due against the defendants which defendants failed to pay despite demands from the plaintiff.

2. I had the benefit of hearing Mr.J.Barathan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.T.S.Mohamed Mohideen, learned Standing Counsel, who took notice on behalf of the respondents, namely, the Commissioner, Madurai City Municipal Corporation and the Assistant Commissioner (Zone 2), Madurai City Municipal Corporation. 2/6 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.(MD)No.6070 of 2020

3. The petitioner in his affidavit had stated that the property bearing plot No.131, East Fifth Street, K.K.Nagar, Madurai Town, originally belonged to his mother, and later devolved to the petitioner. The assessment was also transferred in his name in the revenue records. He claims to have paid the property tax, water tax, drainage maintenance charges up to second half year of 2017-2018. The petitioner was employed in Alagappa University and owing to that, had let out the property on rent and the tenant had put the property to commercial use. This was during the period 2015–2017. It has been informed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that originally the property was assessed to pay at around Rs.3,000/- per half year. Subsequently, the impugned order came to be passed and in the same time, the rental value per square feet at Rs.9/- had been fixed and a demand has been raised for a sum of Rs.47,580/- which has been claimed to be the property tax assessed per half year. The learned counsel claims that this is highly un-reasonable and also complains that necessary opportunity had not been granted to him prior to re-assessment of the property tax. 3/6 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.(MD)No.6070 of 2020

2. The facts necessitating the filing of the present Writ Petition are that the petitioner claims that she was working in the Highways Department and was maintaining her family consisting of her husband, one son and two daughters. The son and first daughter have been married and they are residing separately. The second daughter, who is shown as the third respondent is not married. The petitioner has stated that her husband had died and after that, the third respondent had been continuously harassing her and has been preventing her from enjoying her dwelling house peacefully and 2/6 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P.(MD)No.6099 of 2020 has been trying to dispossess her. Seeking protection under the Tamil Nadu Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 and Tamil Nadu Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules 2009, the petitioner had given a representation on 07.03.2020 to the first and second respondents.

2.We commend the efforts taken by the Police in tracing the girl in the present strained circumstances.

3.In view of the above, this Habeas Corpus petition stands closed.

[ P.N.P.J.,] [ B.P.J.,] 05.05.2020 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No dsk 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in H.C.P(MD)No.252 of 2020 To

2. The Petitioner, who has completed her graduation in M.B.B.S. in Medicine and Surgery in the year 2018 had participated in the Post Graduate NEET Examination, 2020 conducted by the Third Respondent and has a score of 690. During the first round of counselling in All India Quota, she secured Master of Surgery in Obstetrics and Gynecology in the College of the Fourth Respondent and had paid admission fees. However, she intends to further participate in counselling in the State Government Quota seats including those in Non-Governmental Institutions. One of the conditions stipulated for already selected candidates in the All India Quota to participate in the State Government Quota is that they should would have to resign from the seat secured within the specified date. In furtherance thereto, the First Respondent by notice dated 30.04.2020 had informed that it had been decided by the Competent Authority to allow the candidates who have joined their allotted college of Round -1 (both in Online/Offline mode) to resign from their joined seat by 5.00 p.m. of 08.05.2020 (Wednesday). It is the grievance of the Petitioner that the Second Respondent had not included the Management Seats in the Private/Non-Governmental Medical Institutions in the notification issued for Counselling under the State Quota. In that backdrop, this Writ Petition 3/7 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P. (MD) No. 6132 of 2020 and W.M.P. (MD) No. 5322 of 2020 has been filed for directing the Second Respondent to conduct and conclude the Counselling of Post Graduation Medical Seats in Private/Non-Governmental Medical Institutions along with the State Government Quota Seats for the academic Session 2020-2021 on or before 08.05.2020 by considering her representation dated 30.05.2020 in that regard.

2. The Petitioner, who has completed her graduation in M.B.B.S. in Medicine and Surgery in the year 2018 had participated in the Post Graduate NEET Examination, 2020 conducted by the Third Respondent and has a score of 690. During the first round of counselling in All India Quota, she secured Master of Surgery in Obstetrics and Gynecology in the College of the Fourth Respondent and had paid admission fees. However, she intends to further participate in counselling in the State Government Quota seats including those in Non-Governmental Institutions. One of the conditions stipulated for already selected candidates in the All India Quota to participate in the State Government Quota is that they should would have to resign from the seat secured within the specified date. In furtherance thereto, the First Respondent by notice dated 30.04.2020 had informed that it had been decided by the Competent Authority to allow the candidates who have joined their allotted college of Round -1 (both in Online/Offline mode) to resign from their joined seat by 5.00 p.m. of 08.05.2020 (Wednesday). It is the grievance of the Petitioner that the Second Respondent had not included the Management Seats in the Private/Non-Governmental Medical Institutions in the notification issued for Counselling under the State Quota. In that backdrop, this Writ Petition 3/7 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P. (MD) No. 6132 of 2020 and W.M.P. (MD) No. 5322 of 2020 has been filed for directing the Second Respondent to conduct and conclude the Counselling of Post Graduation Medical Seats in Private/Non-Governmental Medical Institutions along with the State Government Quota Seats for the academic Session 2020-2021 on or before 08.05.2020 by considering her representation dated 30.05.2020 in that regard.

2. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn granting such liberty. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

07.05.2020 Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No sj Note: Issue order copy by 13.05.2020 To

1.The Chief Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

2. The Director of Medical Education, Directorate of Medical Education, Kilpauk, Chennai – 600 010.

2.According to the respondent police, one Arokiyamary was on her morning walk on 19.01.2020 in Alakudi Road when she was robbed of her gold chain. A person coming from behind in a two wheeler bearing Registration No.TN 47 AQ 5726 intercepted her and threatened her with a knife and took away her one sovereign gold chain. The occurrence is said to have taken place at about 06.30 A.M and the complaint was lodged at around 8.00 A.M. It was registered as Crime No.10 of 2020 by the respondent for the offences under Sections 392 and 397 of I.P.C.

The Indian automotive sector will continue to face challenges related to non-availability of labour and concerns over health and safety management on the shop-floor following the coronavirus pandemic, which may force firms to accelerate adoption of digital technologies in manufacturing, a report by consultancy firm EY said. This health crisis will settle gradually and would leave a profound impact on people and the ways of working especially on the shop-floor. There will be several changes to existing working norms and guidelines that organisations will need to abide by in order to ensure safety at the workplace, said the report titled 'Now, next and beyond: Auto factory of the future'. Elaborating on how automotive shop-floors will evolve and adopt digital technologies post COVID-19, the report said automobile companies will now have to rebuild and reinvent a new ecosystem to accommodate the new normal that is likely to emerge. "The auto sector will continue to face challenges ...

India's fuel consumption fell almost 46 per cent in April as all petroleum products, except LPG, saw massive demand erosion following the nationwide lockdown that halted economic activity and travel. The demand, which showed signs of pick up in the last 10 days of April after the government allowed resumption of economic activity beyond the urban municipal limit, is likely to rebound in second half of May as more areas are opened. India's fuel consumption fell 45.8 per cent to 9.929 million tonnes in April, down from 18.32 million tonnes fuel consumed in the same month a year back, according to official data released by the petroleum ministry. Fuel consumption during March, when travel restrictions began to be imposed to curb the spread of coronavirus, stood at 16.08 million tonnes. Petrol sales were down 60.43 per cent to 9,73,000 tonnes in April. The demand for the fuel had fallen 64 per cent in first half of the month, but there was some pick up in sales after reopening of some ...

Tour the five luxury homes featured in our Listing of the Day series this week

While Mayawati's projects to build parks and statues have drawn derision in the drawing rooms of the stately homes in the country, the people at her rallies are in awe of her. Her work is Dalit power, they feel and will make her immortal. Kulsum Mustafa has more.

I turn 50 this week!!! Yup! Half a century on this planet! Not exactly the sparkling celebration I thought I’d have, given the lockdown and social distancing, but it’s certainly going to memorable with its...

Weekly Books News (May 4-10)

The deadline for payment of electricity bills for March-April has been extended till May 30, the state government took the decision on Saturday. This is for power customers of all electricity distribution companies in the state.

In recent weeks, the Donald Trump administration has repeatedly lashed out at China over its handling of the outbreak, questioning its death toll and criticising its early response to the virus.

Highly leveraged companies may find the going tough in the next few months, as rapid rise in covid-19 infections, make business prospects highly unpredictable. Even if infections abate in the next three months or so, companies that have high levels

Charlie Munger, the vice-chairman of Berkshire Hathway, the investment company controlled by billionaire Warren Buffet, is not looking at making investments amid the COVID-19 crisis. In a recent telephonic interview with the Wall Street Journal, Munger was asked if his investment

On Friday, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) released a notification on the issue price of the latest tranche of the SGB scheme that will open on 11 May. It will be Series II of the Sovereign Gold Bond Scheme 2020-21

The deadline for payment of electricity bills for March-April has been extended till May 30, the state government took the decision on Saturday. This is for power customers of all electricity distribution companies in the state.

A special bench was hearing a writ petition filed by the All India Centre Council of Trade Unions(AICCTU) questioning the government's rationale to cancel trains that were meant to ferry migrant labourers back to their homes.

The State Transport (ST) bus service will be made available on the condition of fulfilling certain conditions to ensure that coronavirus does not spread to other parts of the state

Berlin, May 5: Several drugs approved for the treatment of hepatitis C viral infection have been identified as potential candidates against COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, according to a study based on extensive calculations using supercomputer simulations.

London, May 8: The anteater-like mammals, pangolins, possess an evolutionary advantage against coronavirus, according to researchers, who say that understanding the animal's immune system may help develop new treatment options for COVID-19. According to the scientists from the Medical

New Delhi, May 09: The evaluation for class 10, 12 board exams will be done by teachers at their homes and 3,000 schools have been identified as exam centres to deliver the answer sheets to them, Union HRD Minister Ramesh Pokhriyal

The post-production activities of the Malayalam cinema will begin on May 4, 2020. The Kerala Government has reportedly granted permission to the film crews to resume the post-production activities on the third phase of the lockdown. AK Balan, the Minister Of

ലോകമെമ്പാടുമുള്ള അധ്വാനിക്കുന്ന തൊഴിലാളി ജനതയുടെ അവിസ്മരണീയ ദിനമാണ് മെയ് ഒന്ന്. തൊഴിലാളികളുടെ മനുഷ്യാവകാശങ്ങള്‍ നേടിയെടുത്തതിന്റെ ഓര്‍മ്മ പുതുക്കുന്ന ദിനം. എട്ടു മണിക്കൂര്‍ ജോലി, എട്ടു മണിക്കൂര്‍ വിനോദം, എട്ടു മണിക്കൂര്‍ വിശ്രമം എന്ന അവകാശം അമേരിക്കന്‍ മുതലാളിത്തത്തിന്റെ കൈകളില്‍ നിന്നു പിടിച്ചു വാങ്ങിയ സഹന സമരത്തെ ഓര്‍മിപ്പിക്കുന്നതാണ് ഈ ദിനം. അമേരിക്കയിലെ ചിക്കാഗോയില്‍ നടന്ന

Ever since the lockdown has been announced, mythological show, Ramayan and its actors are hitting headlines for one or the other reason. As the viewers are aware, Doordarshan had re-aired Ramayan during lockdown on popular demand. The iconic show broke all

Kaun Banega Crorepati is a show that most of us have grown up with and have participated in, sitting comfortably at our homes, yet feeling the same complex set of emotions as the participants on the coveted Hot Seat. We have

The Coronavirus outbreak has brought everything to halt. Shooting of the films and shows are not happening due to the lockdown. Since no new episodes are being shot, the channels are forced either to re-air the old episodes or re-run old

The latest BARC/TRP ratings for the Week 17 (April 25-May 1, 2020) are here. The mythological shows are still ruling the TRP chart. Among the mythological shows, Doordarshan National's Uttar Ramayan is at the tops slot while DD Bharti's Mahabharat has

Anurag Kashyap's production Ghoomketu, starring Nawazuddin Siddiqui will finally release this month on the ZEE5 streaming platform, on May 22. Directed by  Pushpendra Nath Mishra, the film was originally set to release in 2018. The film also stars  Anurag Kashyap as

Japanese Economy Minister Yasutoshi Nishimura said on Sunday the government is looking to lift the state of emergency in "many of 34 prefectures" that are not among the hardest hit by the coronavirus pandemic before the nationwide deadline of May 31.

Australia's most populous state, home to Sydney, will allow restaurants, playgrounds and outdoor pools to reopen on Friday as extensive testing has shown the spread of the coronavirus has slowed sharply, New South Wales state's premier said on Sunday.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and nationwide lockdown, all film and television shoots in the country had come to a complete halt in March. However, according to the latest development, the Karnataka government has now granted permission for Kannada Television shows to