The High Court dismissed the writ petition for default due to the petitioners' non-appearance and lack of representation at three consecutive hearing dates, resulting in the abandonment of the proceedings.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI
WRIT PETITION No.2928 OF 2007
BETWEEN:
1. Smt. K. Revathi W/o. K. Manmadha Rao, Sarpanch, LN Peta Gram Panchayat, LN Peta Mandal, Srikakulam District, and another.
…. PETITIONERS
And
1. Superintending Engineer, Irrigation, Srikakulam, and another.
…. RESPONDENTS
Counsel for petitioners: Sri M. Viswanadham
Counsel for respondents: G.P. for Irrigation & CAD.
The Court made the following order:
ORDER:
When the writ petition was posted on 26.08.2010, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners, and hence, the matter was directed to be posted on 27.08.2010. The matter was again listed on 6.09.2010. Even on the said date, none appeared for the petitioners and there was no representation on their behalf. Therefore, the matter was directed to be posed on 9.09.2010 under the caption “For Dismissal”. Accordingly, the matter is posted today under the caption “For Dismissal”. Today also there is neither appearance nor any representation on behalf of the petitioners.
The Writ Petition is therefore dismissed for default. There shall be no order as to costs.
________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 9th September, 2010 Js.
Smt. K. Revathi and another
Superintending Engineer, Irrigation, Srikakulam and another
Noushad Ali
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
