Writ petition filed regarding non-disposal of a representation. Court found matter settled via hearing and quarter sitting orders reserved, leading to dismissal.
Coercive steps for recovery of dues restrained until representation orders are passed.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.24193 of 2006
Date: 23-04-2007.
Between :
K.Madhava Reddy & others.
…..Petitioners
And
The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad & another.
…..Respondents.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.24193 of 2006
ORDER : (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Bilal Nazki)
Heard learned counsel for petitioners. Nobody appears for respondents.
The only grievance of petitioners is that they had made certain representation to the 1st respondent, which is not being disposed of. Learned counsel for petitioners submit that after filing of writ petition, they were called by the respondents and were heard in the matter and orders on their representation have not so far been passed.
Since the petitioners have already been heard by the respondents on their representation and orders are reserved, keeping alive this writ petition would not serve any purpose and therefore, the writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, it is directed that coercive steps may not be taken by the respondents to recover any dues from the petitioners till orders on their representation are
passed.
_______________ BILAL NAZKI, J
23rd April 2007
_____________________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J ajr
K. Madhava Reddy & others
The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad
Bilal Nazki
Nooty Ramamohana Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
