R. Jaisimha Reddy, v. Government of A.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA…
What did the court decide?
The writ appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution; the interim order granted on 1.12.2003 was vacated.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA…
The writ appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution; the interim order granted on 1.12.2003 was vacated.
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 THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO
Writ Appeal No.1825 of 2003
DATED:18.11.2014
Between: A.Jaisimha Reddy, Tirumalayapalem Mandal, Khammam District.
… Appellant
And Government of A.P., Represented by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Hyderabad.
….Respondent
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO
Writ Appeal No.1825 of 2003
Judgment: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)
This matter is an old matter of the year 2003 and it was taken up for hearing from time to time. We mention the dates on which adjournment was sought for and granted. On 25.9.2014, the matter was adjourned. Again, on 8.10.2014 and 13.11.2014, the matter was adjourned. Today, again an adjournment is sought for. We are not inclined to grant any adjournment in this matter.
Therefore, the writ appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. The interim order granted on 1.12.2003 shall stand vacated.
The miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed. No costs.
_________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ
_______________________ M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO,
J
18th November, 2014
Pnb
A. Jaisimha Reddy
Government of A.P.
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta
M.S. Ramachandra Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court