The High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati dismissed Writ Petition No. 30744 of 2017 as infructuous upon counsel's submission that the cause of action no longer survives.
The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous.
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 FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
o L,B
U ■■r 'r
Sh
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 30744 OF 2017
Between:
...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 issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus challenging the proceedings vide Rc.No.1192/2017(B), Dt.28.07.2017 issued by the 3rd respondent in directing to pay Rs.50,000/for releasing Tractor & Trailor bearing NO.AP02-TC-8028 & AP02-TC-8029 is illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the 5th respondent to release thesameforthwith
Counsel for the Petitioner :SRI. N ASWARTHA NARAYANA
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR INDUSTRIES&COMMERCE
Counsel for the Respondents Nos.2 to 4: GP FOR REVENUE
f' *
Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : GP FOR HOME
The Court made the following Order:
lb’
APHC010086922017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH 05B AT AMARAVATI m (Special Original Jurisdiction)
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3310]
TUESDAY ,THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 30744/2017
Between:
A. Adinarayana Reddy, S/o. Pedda Narayana Reddy ...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep By Its Principal and ...RESPONDENT(S) Others
Counsel for the Petitioner:
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE (AP)
2.GP FOR REVENUE (AP)
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr.S.Mahendra, learned counsel representing Mr.N.Aswartha Narayana,learnedcounsel for the petitioner, submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and it has become infructuous.
- Recording the above submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed
as infructuous. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stands
closed.
To,
//TRUE COPY//
Sd/- KJ.RAJA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 0^
SECTION OFFICER
SSR
Criminal Section
HIGH COURT
DATED:05/11/2024
ORDER
WP.No.30744 of 2017
c ^ m ?o»
DISMISSING THE WP AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
A. Adinarayana Reddy
The State of Andhra Pradesh
K Manmadha Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
