Writ petition withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition.

Eleven petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a declaration that specified provisions of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Lands for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997, were unconstitutional, and consequential relief restraining acquisition-related work.

At the hearing, petitioners’ counsel sought leave to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh writ petition.

1. Whether the petitioners could withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh writ petition.

2. What orders should be made on the pending applications for joining the petitioners in one writ petition and for interim relief.

The petition was brought under Article 226 of the Constitution, but the Court did not decide any substantive constitutional or statutory question.

The order records no legal test, precedent, or rule governing withdrawal; it gives effect to counsel’s request to withdraw the petition with liberty to file afresh.

The Court did not examine the validity of the challenged provisions or the merits of the requested restraint. It accepted the petitioners’ request to withdraw with liberty to institute a fresh writ petition.

It also ordered the application seeking permission for the petitioners to join together, noting that separate court fees had been paid, and dismissed the other interim application consequentially.

The application to permit the petitioners to join together was ordered, and the other interim application was dismissed.