Dismissed

Tikkavarapu Sanath Kumar Reddy v. The District Collector Nellore

Telangana HC16 Dec 2010WP/2704/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition challenging the deletion of the petitioner's name from the voters' list of a Water Users Association. The court observed that the cause did not survive the length of time and dismissed the petition, leaving the petitioner at liberty to file an appeal.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the competent authority if his name is not included in the voters' list. No order as to costs.

Tikkavarapu Sanath Kumar Reddy Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO:2704 OF 2005

¶4

DATED:16.12.2010

¶5

Between:

¶6

Tikkavarapu Sanath Kumar Reddy

¶7

.....PETITIONER

¶8

AND

¶9

1. The District Collector, Nellore and others.

¶10

.....RESPONDENTS

¶11

This Court made the following :

¶12

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU

¶13

WRIT PETITION NO:2704 OF 2005

¶14

ORDER:

¶15

This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the action on the part of the respondents in deleting the petitioner’s name in the voters’ list of Macharlavaripalem Water Users Association, T.C.IV, T.P. Gudur Mandal, Nellore District, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, to direct the respondents to include/insert the name of the petitioner in the Voters’ list of Macharlavaripalem Water Users Association, Gudur Mandal, Nellore District.

¶16

According to the petitioner, he had purchased land admeasuring Ac.0.54 cents by way of registered sale deed within Macharlavaripalem village about six months prior to the filing of the writ petition and he also purchased Ac.3.66 cents of land in Sy.No.181/2 by way of an agreement of sale, within Macharlavaripalem village limits. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that the 3^rd respondent proposed to issue an election notification of Water Users Association of Macharlavaripalem village, but his name was not included. Though he made a representation, the same was not considered.

¶17

There is no necessity of going into all the details.

¶18

On 15.3.2005 in WPMP No.3642 of 2005, this Court while ordering notice observed that the order of notice will not preclude the petitioner in preferring an appeal before the competent authority. Even otherwise, I am of the opinion that the cause in the writ petition may not survive at this length of time. However, the writ petitioner is at liberty to file an appeal before the competent authority, if his name is not included in the voters’ list of Water Users Association of Macharlavaripalem village, Gudur Mandal, Nellore District.

¶19

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶20

______________________

¶21

Dated:16.12.2010 Nn.

¶22

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU

¶23

WRIT PETITION NO:2704 OF 2005

¶24

16.12.2010

Tikkavarapu Sanath Kumar Reddy v. The District Collector Nellore

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tikkavarapu Sanath Kumar Reddy v. The District Collector Nellore

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaik Shamsad Begm Vs Rayalaseema Grameena Bank

K.Anil Reddy Vs Tahsildar Rajendranagar Tahsil

S.Parvathi , Vs The Secretary, Aprei Society (R)

Andhra Pradesh Weaker Section Housing Vs The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District

T.V. Acharyulu Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Vemula Govindamani, Vs State of Ap.