Order closing Writ Petition challenging lease proceedings. Court held no further orders necessary due to a subsequent order directing lease extension consideration.
Writ Petition is closed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, also stand closed.
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 A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.28671 of 2008
ORDER:
Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
This Writ Petition was filed challenging the proceedings of the fourth respondent dated 29.09.2008, whereunder it was stated that the lease period expired on 31.01.2008 and the petitioners were asked to vacate the mulgies. It was also stated that the petitioners had not paid the rent from 01.02.2008 to 31.12.2008.
This Court, by order dated 31.12.2008, asked the first respondent to consider the request of the petitioners for extension of lease in their favour in terms of the report submitted by the third respondent dated 24.09.2008 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four weeks.
Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of the subsequent orders, no further orders are necessary in the present Writ Petition.
Recording the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the Writ Petition is closed. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
(A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J)
10.12.2014 vs
Petitioners
Government Pleader for respondents
A.Ramalingeswara Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
