Dismissed

Prof.Gaddam Laxman v. The State of Telangana and another

Telangana HC16 Jul 2021WP/14571/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Prof. Gaddam Laxman against a State Government order. Permission was granted to withdraw the petition following the lifting of a ban on petitioner's organization, leading to the order being dismissed as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Permission for withdrawal of writ petition; dismissal of Writ Petition as withdrawn without costs.

Prof.Gaddam Laxman Vs The State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

FRIDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶5

wRtT PET|T|ON NO. 14s71 0F 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

Prof.Gaddam Laxman, S/o.Balaiah Aged about 62 years, Occ.President of Civil Liberties Committee, Fl/o. Rajashekar Colony, Uppal, Hyderabud. ...r=r,r,O*=*

¶8

AND1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Buildings,^(BR Bhavan), Hyderabad, Telangana State. 2. The Director General of Police, For The State of Telangana, Lakadikapool, HYderabad

¶9

...RESP'NDENT'

¶10

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be^pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more^particularly one^{in the natureof} Writ of Mandamus declare the action of Respondent No.1 herein in^passing impugned order in GO.Ms.No.73, dated. 3010312021 as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of thd Constitution^{of lndiaand} lnternational Covenants on Human Rights.

¶11

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶12

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be^{pleasedto stay the} impugned GO.Ms.No.73, dated.30/03/2021^passed by the Respondent^{No.1 herein} Pending disposal of the writ^petition.

¶13

Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. SANDHYA RANI REPRESENTING^FOR SRI JELLA LINGAIAH

¶14

Counsel forthe Respondents: GP FOR HOME

¶15

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶16

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K' LAKSHMAN}

¶17

WRIT PETITION^{No'14571 of 2O21}

¶18

ORDER:

¶19

Ms. Sandhya^{Rani, learned counsel representing} Sri Jella^{Lingaiah, learned counselfor the petitioner'would} submit that^{the Governmenthas lifted the ban on certain} organizations^{includingthe organizationof petitionerand} therefore,^{she seekspermissionof this Court to withdrawthe} present writ Petition.

¶20

Permission^{is accorded'}

¶21

Accordingly,^{this WritPetition isdismissedas}

¶22

withdrawn.^{No costs'}

¶23

Miscellaneous^{petitions, ifany' pending' shallstand}

closed.

iSSldSl?H["HtE /

l-.-

//TRUE^COPY, SECTION^OFFTCER

¶29

T''1. ?,lB 33ji".,i$"lf1fj:t?:1'h0fl'333'f^{[?1H."1,,te or reranganaat Hvderabad} .. [1'JJo^copies. 4. One^{SPare uoPY'}

MP KM

HIGH COURT

DATED:1610712021

ORDER

"$
sTATE
1
s5 ruGt$tl
:loo

*
c.',

¶36

WP.No.14571 of 2021

¶37

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS

¶38

CrPis

¶39

z<br>

Prof.Gaddam Laxman v. The State of Telangana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prof.Gaddam Laxman v. The State of Telangana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

E. Navin Kumar Vs State of Telangana

Mr. Thota Pavan Vs Department of Home

Mohammed Sameed Ali Vs The State of Telangana

Aleem MD Vs The State of Telangana

P. Prasanth , Perupally Prasanth Vs P.Ramyasri

puttapaka Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana