M.K.Padmasri Vs State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR

WRIT PETITION No. 17270 of 2016

ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Government Pleader for Revenue and Sri Chatla Madhu, Standing Counsel for G.H.M.C. With the consent of all the parties, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶5

There is no necessity to put the unofficial respondents on notice as this Court is not venturing to adjudicate the issue on merits.

¶6

The present writ petition came to be filed seeking issuance of writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondent Nos.2 to 4 in not acting upon the representation dated 09.05.2016 made by the petitioners bringing to their notice about the illegal encroachments of open land/park/road made by the un-official respondents.

¶7

Though various grounds are raised in the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioners restricts his prayer seeking a direction to the respondents to consider the representation, dated 09.05.2016 at the earliest.

¶8

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of, directing the second respondent to dispose of the representation dated 09.05.2016 made by the petitioners, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, if the same is still pending

¶9

consideration. It is needless to mention that the second respondent shall hear the petitioners and also the un-official respondents before passing any orders on the representation dated 09.05.2016. No order as to costs.

¶10

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶11

_________________________ JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR 06.06.2016 gkv

M.K.Padmasri v. State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.K.Padmasri v. State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

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

Mantena Venkata Rama Raju Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Marupaka Durgamma Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Shaik Pinjari Bhanu Bi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kodali Suneela, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

J Sambasiva Rao Chennai and Another Vs Secy Home Dept Hyd and 6 Others

K.Prabhakar Hyd Vs Prl Secy Home Dept Hyd and 2 Others