The High Court dismissed Writ Petition No. 20616 of 2006 for default as no representation appeared for the petitioner when the matter was listed for dismissal.
Petition dismissed for default.
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 JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBURARY, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
WRIT PETITION NO. 20616 of 2006
Between:
Sistla Raviteja and others
..... PETITIONERS
AND
Union of India. Rep. By Secretary to Government, Ministry of Home, New Delhi and others
.....RESPONDENTS
The Court made the following:
ORAL ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram)
No representation for the petitioner when called, though the writ petition was listed under the caption for
dismissal.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for default. No order as to costs.
Justice Goda Raghuram
_______________________ Justice Ramesh Ranganathan
February 4, 2010 MAS.
Sistla Raviteja
Union of India
Goda Raghuram
Ramesh Ranganathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
