The High Court closed this writ petition raised against District Collector for non-action on representations. It observed that since the Collector had already acted on them, nothing remained for adjudication.
Writ petition closed with no order as to costs following the respondent's action on representations.
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.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 2539 OF 2020
Between:
AND
...RESP.NDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of lheConstitutionof lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavitfiled therewith,the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or directionmoreparticularlyin the nature of Writ of [,4andamus uAn 226 of Constitutionof lndia declaringthe action of the respondent No.2 in not initiating any action onthe representations daled23-12-2019 and 30-01- 2020 against respondent No.3 asillegal arbitrary and against the principles of naturaljustice and for a consequentialdirection to considerthe representations dated 23-12-2019 and 30-01-2020 andhold enquiry againstrespondent No.3/Sarpanch for abuse ofpower and misappropriationof funds ofthe G ra m panchayat.
lA NO: 1 OF 2020
Petition under Section 151 CPCpraying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent no.2 to consider the representation dated 23.12.2019 and 30.O1 .2020 and hold enquiry against the respondent No.3/Sarpanch for abuse of power and misappropriation of funds of the Gram panchayat, pending disposal of the writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. T. SHARATH
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI G. NARENDER REDDY SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RANI
WRIT PETITION No.2539 of 2020
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed questioning the inaction of respondent No.2 - District Collector, Bhadradri-Kothagudem, in considering the representations dated 23.12.2019 and 30.01.2020 submitted by petitioners with respect to the alleged ornissions and commissions of respondent No.3 - Sarpanch, Mulakalaplli Grarn Panchayat, Mulakalapalli, Khammam.
Now, it transpires that respondent No.2 had acted on the representations alleged to have been submitted by the petitioners and aiter enquiry, he passed orders on 09.02.2020.
Considering the lirnited scope of the relief sought bythe petitioners and as the same stands granted, nothing survives for adjudication in this Writ Petition.
Accordingly. this Writ Petition is closed.
Miscellaneous applications, ifany pending' shall also stand
closed. There shall beno order as to costs.
SD/.M.MANJULA ASSISTATIT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY' ci, cl".-SECTION OFFICER
To,
1 One CC to Sri T. Sharath, Advocate [OPUC] 2 Two CCs to GP for Panchayat Raj Rural Development, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad(OUT) .) One CC to Sri G. Narender Reddy, SC for Gram Panchayat [OPUC] 4 Two CD Copies CHR
\ )-
HIGH COURT
DATED:0611012020
ORDER
','u&
!IAI€
1
(
z
14 001[m !'C,
.+ t)
," ,4 t
rcP (o
.snar
W.P.No.2539 of 2020
CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS
G )t,,.'"p \i .'"'
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition questioning inaction of the District Collector survives for adjudication after he had acted on the representations and passed an order.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Dubba Sunitha and Others
State of Telangana
District Collector, Bhadradri-Kothagudem
Sarpanch, Mulakalapalli
Challa Kodanda Ram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
