Dismissed

Dasari Suresh Chaithanya S/o. Late Sri Ravi Kumar, v. The Election Commissioner

Telangana HC19 Jul 2013WP/21405/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench dismissed a premature writ petition filed against the Election Commissioner of Andhra Pradesh for not disposing of a representation within two days of transferring a police station, holding there was no ground for judicial interference.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed; miscellaneous petitions pending shall stand closed accordingly. No costs.

Dasari Suresh Chaithanya S/o. Late Sri Ravi Kumar, Vs The… — Election Law | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SRI N.V. RAMANA

¶2

and

¶3

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶4

Writ Petition No. 21405 of 2013

¶5

DATED: 19..07..2013

¶6

Between:

¶7

Dasari Suresh Chaithanya

¶8

… Petitioner

¶9

And

¶10

The Election Commissioner, The State Election Commission, A.P. Hyderabad & Others.

¶11

… Respondents

¶12

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SRI N.V. RAMANA

¶13

and

¶14

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶15

Writ Petition No. 21405 of 2013

¶16

ORDER:(Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Sri N.V. Ramana)

¶17

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the 1^st respondent in not disposing of the petitioner’s representation dated 15.7.2013 as illegal and arbitrary, and for a consequential direction to the 1^st respondent to dispose of the same forthwith.

¶18

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material on record.

¶19

3. The petitioner made his representation to the 1^st respondent only on 15.07.2013 stating that the 2^nd Respondent has transferred the 3^rd respondent from Kovvur Police Station to Naidupet station, by violating the Election Code of Conduct. Immediately thereafter within a period of two days, the petitioner rushed to this Court by way of filing the present writ petition on 17.07.2013 itself, attributing inaction to the 1^st respondent in disposing of his representation. We see no ground to entertain this premature writ petition seeking interference of this Court with the alleged inaction on the part of the 1^st respondent.

¶20

4. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed accordingly. No costs.

¶21

N.V. RAMANA, J

¶22

VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR,J Dt. 19..07.2013 Kv

¶23

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SRI N.V. RAMANA and

¶24

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶25

Writ Petition No. 21405 of 2013 (ORDER of the Division Bench delivered by the Hon’ble Sri Justice Sri N.V. Ramana)

¶26

19..07..2013 Kv

Dasari Suresh Chaithanya S/o. Late Sri Ravi Kumar, v. The Election Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dasari Suresh Chaithanya S/o. Late Sri Ravi Kumar, v. The Election Commissioner

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

The Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd. Vs M/s. Aruna Industries, Rep. by its Proprietrix Smt. M. Aruna

E. Rama Rao, S/o E. Venkappa Vs The Honble IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Miyapur

Singampally Ramana, Vs The Tahsildar, Chintapalli, Visakhapatnam Dist.

Koneru Padmavathi, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd. Vs Chemie Fine Laboratories Private Limited

Sri.Poonam Chand Jain, Vs Authorised Officer, The Cosmos Co-operative Bank Ltd.