Writ petition dismissed as infructuous after counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cause no longer survives. No order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications closed.
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.
[3310]
APHC010027822015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 19298/2015
Between:
Jatawath Srinu Naik S/o. Keerya Naik
...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.N RAVI PRASAD
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP)
2.ELEVATED AS JUDGE
The Court made the following:
ORDER :
Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr N.Ravi Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and it has become infructuous.
as infructuous. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stands
closed.
_________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.
Date: 09.12.2024 TM
Jatawath Srinu Naik S/o. Keerya Naik
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others
K Manmadha Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
