Writ petition dismissed for default/nonprosecution as counsel for the petitioner was absent on both list dates, despite the matter being listed under 'FOR DISMISSAL'.
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 V.V.S.RAO
WRIT PETITION No.7085 of 2010
April 09, 2010
Between:
A.Mallikarjun Rao, S/o.Panduranga Rao
… Petitioner And The District Panchayat Officer, Ranga Reddy District And another ... Respondents
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO
WRIT PETITION No.7085 of 2010
ORDER:
The writ petition came up for admission on 30.3.2010 in Motion List cases on top of the list. In spite of the same, the counsel for petitioner was absent and there was no representation. Therefore, while adjourning the matter, it was directed to be listed under the caption ‘FOR DISMISSAL’. Today also, though the matter is listed under the said caption and the list is circulated to the counsel well in advance, the counsel for petitioner is absent and there is no representation.
The writ petition is therefore dismissed for default/nonprosecution.
______________ (V.V.S. RAO, J)
April 09, 2010 YS
A.Mallikarjun Rao
The District Panchayat Officer, Ranga Reddy District
another
V.V.S. Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
