Dismissed
Syed Khairath All v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
Telangana HCPIL/253/2015
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND HON’BLE…
What the court decided
AI extract
CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND HON’BLE…
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.
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
P.I.L No. 253 OF 2015
26-10-2015
Between: Syed Khairath Ali, Hyderabad.
… Petitioner
And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Principal Secretary to Government, Minorities Welfare (IDM) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and others.
… Respondents
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
P.I.L No. 253 OF 2015
PC: (per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale)
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Sri K. Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel holding for
Sri M.A.K. Mukheed, Advocate on record for respondent No.3, submits that respondent No.3 shall decide petitioner’s representation dated 31.07.2015 within a period of four weeks from today.
In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for respondent No.3, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the petition.
Petition is disposed of as not pressed. The statement made by learned counsel for respondent No.3 that respondent No.3 shall decide the representation within four weeks from today is accepted. All contentions of the parties are kept open.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, also stand disposed of.
_________________________ DILIP B. BHOSALE, ACJ
________________________ S.V. BHATT, J 26-10-2015 va
Syed Khairath Ali
State of Andhra Pradesh
DILIP B. BHOSALE
S.V. BHATT
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court