Petitioner submitted that the cause of action no longer subsists. The High Court dismissed the Writ Petition as infructuous without separate reasons.
Writ Petition dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.
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.
1
APHC010045902015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3310]
WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 22679/2015
Between:
D. Sundar Rami Reddy, Spsr Nellore Dist.
...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of A P Mines Hyd Anr and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.VEDULA SRINIVAS
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY (AP)
The Court made the following:
ORDER :
Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Mrs.P.Priyanvita,
learned counsel, representing Mr.Vedula Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and it has become infructuous.
2
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stands closed.
_________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.
Date: 13.11.2024
ARR
3
HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO
Writ Petition No.22679 of 2015
Date: 13.11.2024
ARR
D. Sundar Rami Reddy
The State Of A P Mines Hyd Anr and Others
DR. K. MANMADHA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
