The petitioner's counsel stated that the cause of action in the writ petition no longer survived and the matter had become 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.
1
APHC010734282015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3333]
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION NO: 38197/2015
Between:
Komulsetty Subbamma, W/o Yerraiah
...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
The Court made the following:
2
ORDER
Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and the
matter has become infructuous.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
KGR
Komulsetty Subbamma
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others
V. Sujatha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
