Dismissed

Ranga Rao Setti v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC3 Dec 2020WP/21925/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court permitted the withdrawal of two writ petitions—one challenging mutation of ownership rights and another seeking tax collection relief—subject to the liberty of filing fresh petitions after obtaining necessary particulars. Pending applications were dismissed with party to costs. Result: dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh one after obtaining necessary particulars; miscellaneous applications dismissed.

Ranga Rao Setti Vs The State of Telangana — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

Ar^{HY D E R AB AD} H^r c^{H c o u R* o *,} JI'5.i"1 3Lt,:5 :: :,t}:#i

¶2

THURSDAY,^{THE THIRDDAY OFDEC'EI,4BER} rwo^{rHdusnNDANDTwENTY}

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE^{SRIJUSTICECHALLAKODANDARAM} WRI TPE TITIO^{NN o:219250F2020}

¶5

ffi?3ffi^{tr+f i:liJrrls?ai,,:H#rtar} ."PETITtONER ,$,ryt+gffiU'*Li.ff

¶6

AND

¶7

1 k'':ft'ff [ff^{:in:"{'i:,$"1.;?ii1[ilff :r';1lTtiry[#]iE:''n::'}'*'

¶8

v^{a t' Na sp u r ViI I a g e a nd}

¶9

2 ??,l:'tri,l"@#J:? n ?"!3 [ I " q' n u r G ram a-l 9 Xcfr; a bo ut^{38^ yea rs occ}

¶10

3 gltl,lY;:;tis[ PjHfl f, :fr ;,ii3# (q:,le "o Housewife,^{R/o H No. S-+2.'i';i;i"drd,iiiapwlt/and5t, AdilabadDistrict.} Telangana^{- 504204.} "?,1"f ...RESPONDENTS Petition under^Article 226 ol^{lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the}

¶11

circumstancesstatedrntheaffidavitfiledtherewith'theHighCourtmaybepleasedto issue a writ or orders^{or directions, especially one in the nature of writ of I'4andamus} under Article^{226 of Constitution of lndia, declaringthat the actionof the Respondenl} No. 2 in effecting^{the mutation of the name of the RespondentNo 3 as ownerin} panchayat records without^{legal transfer in title as a violationof fundamentalrights} andviotativeofArticlel4and2lofConStitutionoflndiaandconsequentlydlrectthe RespondentNo'2torestorethenameofthePetitioneraSownerinthepanchayat record s.

¶12

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶13

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the} affidavit filed in support of the^{petition, the High courtmaybe pleased to directthe} Respondent No.2 collect the^{property tax fromthe Petitioner only and consequently} issue receipts to him in regards to his^{property H.No.5-6211} ,^{Situated at Sy No.'102l3,} Mancherial, Adilabad District^(Now Mancherial District), until^{the disposal of the writ} petition.

¶14

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. VANKINA ALLU AND PARTNERS

¶15

Counsel for the Respondent No.1:

¶16

GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEVELOPMENT

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI G. NARENDER REDDY,

¶18

SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: NONE APPEARED

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

't Ht.. iloN'tll-l,l slU.lLSl'lclI cH.\LL--\ Kol).\l)A ltA]l

¶22

\'RI'f PEl-11'lO\ \o. 21925 ol' 2020

¶23

oRl)L,lt:

¶24

tt is pointed out by Sri G^{l'r-areuder Reddl ,learned} Stancling^{(-'oLrnsel,rhar rlith cfttct ll'orn 2018.NaspurGram} Panchayat has^{beco tlelVl trn ic i pal ity-'}

¶25

In those circumstances,^{learnedcounsel tbr petitionerseeks} permission of^{this Court to withdrawthe Writ Petitionwith} liberty to^{the petitioner file a fresh Writ Petition after obtaining} necessary^{particulars '}

¶26

Permissiorr^{is accorded and this Writ Petition is dismissed}

¶27

trs rvithdrawn^{rvith the libert-v as prayed'}

¶28

N4iscellaneor.rs^{applications. ifany pendirrg'shall starld}

¶29

clisrnisscd.^{l'lle le shallbc rro orcle r as to costs}

¶30

SD/.K.VEN IAH ASSISTANT^RE TRAR

¶31

//TRUE^COPY// SECTI N OFFICER

¶32

To,

¶33

"^" illi:^:: I'',

¶34

; ;3lfit51-"*;'gq,##,q$r:x-ffi CHR 't

HIGH COURT

DATED:03112t2020

ORDER

W.P.No.21925 ot 2020

:t 'r'
1 tl s}A 14:
,5e
o 1$ BEC2m i,)z
.<br>

FAl'

¶40

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COTS adlYr.l )r \r\r'F'o

Ranga Rao Setti v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranga Rao Setti v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Kumar Agarwal and Another Vs The Ministry of Corporate Affairs and Another

Avexa - Railone Jv Vs Union of India

Sri Velamati Ramnath Vs Union of India

M/s Gvnr Krishna Hospital Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Errabelli Sujatha Vs The State of Telangana

Smt Etaboina Shirisha Vs State of Telangana