This order addresses a writ petition seeking mandatory directions for armed security. It was disposed of as infructuous based on counsel's submission, with no adjudication on the merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
THE HON’BLE DR JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO
A
<
WRIT PETITION NO: 14479 OF 2013
Between:
M.Maheswar Reddy, S/o. Nagasubba Reddy, Aged 58 Years, Agriculturist R/o. H.No.45/142-9, Venkataramana Colony, Road No.2,Kurnool.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pass orders particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in providing armed security to the petitioner as arbitrary, illegal discriminatory and violative of ARt 14 and 21 of the constitution of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to provide armed security to the petitioner.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2013fWPMP. NO: 17621 OF 2013^
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances statgJ in the affidavit filed in support of the petition,theHighCourtmaybe ple|^e*^ direct the respondents to direct the respondents to forthwith provide* armed security to the petitioner at his cost pending disposal of the above writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P. SASIDHAR REDDY FOR SRI KASA JAGANMOHAN REDDY
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME
The Court made the following: ORDER
TUB HON’BLE DR. JUSTICXIS K. MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION No. 14479 OF 2013
ORDER:
M)-. P. Sasidheir Reddy., learned counsel, representingMr. Kasa J.aganmohan Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner submitt(;d that the cause in this Writ Petition does not survive any furtiier for adjudication and becEime infructuous.
In view of the said submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the V/rit Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.
The miscellane;ous applications pending, if any, shallalso
stand closed.
SD/- U. SRIDEVI ASSISTANT R^ISTRAR //TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To,
Cnr
MET
I
HIGH COURT
DATED: 23/01/2024
ORDER
WP.No.14479 of 2013
DISMISSING THE W.P. AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
M. Maheswar Reddy
The State of A.P.
K. MANMADHA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
