Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

V.Ratnamma, Vs The Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2009)

Home
Telangana HC
2009
V.Ratnamma, Vs The Union of IndiaV.Ratnamma, v. The Union of India

Dismissed

V.Ratnamma, v. The Union of India

Telangana HC8 Jun 2009WP/10140/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged non-issuance of passport under Article 226. Counsel stated the writ petition did not survive for adjudication on merits.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as infructuous; no costs.

What the court decided

AI extract

A

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 10140 of 2009

Between:

V.Ratnamma, W/o. V.Ram Reddy, R/o. 8-4-544/74/44, Sanjaya Nagar, Erragadda, Hyderabad-500 018

..... PETITIONER

AND

The Union of India, Ministry of External Affairs, Regional Passport office, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Reginal Passport Officer,

.....RESPONDENT

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the Respondents in not considering the application of the Petitioner dated 10.02.2009 which is acknowledged in File No.A006119 dated 10.02.2009 for issuance of passport in favour of the Petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the Respondents to consider the application of the Petitioner dated 10.02.2009 for issuance of the passport and pass

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

The Constitution of IndiaArticle 226

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
V. Ratnamma
respondent
The Union of India

Coram

AI extract

G. Rohini

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Telangana HC
Decided on: 8 Jun 2009 · June
Registered: 13 May 2009
Case no.: WP/10140/2009

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from G.rohini

Smt.Krishna Kumari Vs The Commissioner Greater Municipal Corporation of
5 Jun 2009
Suri Prem Kumar Vs The STate rep.by Central Buerue of Investigation
5 Jun 2009
M/s. Dachepalli Publishers Pvt. Ltd., a company incorporated Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its
5 Jun 2009
Ch. Sanker Rao, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Cite this judgement

V.Ratnamma, v. The Union of India, WP/10140/2009 (TEL), decided on 8 June 2009.

The High Court for the State of Telangana publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

The Constitution of IndiaArticle 226

View all statutes

Bench / Coram

G. Rohini

Parties & counsel

Outcome

Petition dismissed as infructuous; no costs.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

The writ petition filed for issuance of passport or declaration of non-consideration as illegal was dismissed as infructuous, as represented by the learned counsel that the cause did not survive for adjudication on merits.

A compact analysis

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.

Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.V.RAMANA

Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN)

The Court made the following :

THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.10140 of 2009

ORDER:

It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication on merits.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous.

No costs.

_______________ Justice G.Rohini

Date:08.06.2009 mrb

CNR

HBHC010526962009

Topic

Writ and Judicial Review

Bench

Disposal

DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS

8 Jun 2009

Mallisetty Rama Devi, Vs The Auction Superintendent

8 Jun 2009

K. Somayachari Vs Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary

8 Jun 2009