Dismissed
Muppidi Ananth Reddy v. The Union of India
Telangana HCWP/4887/2019
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
u Rr' " i JI.5 :"T *,'n,? 5 :',is}Sfl l$ Ar…
What the court decided
AI extract
u Rr' " i JI.5 :"T *,'n,? 5 :',is}Sfl l$ Ar…
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.
ArHYDE RAB AD H' GH c o u Rr' " iJI.5:"T *,'n,?5 :',is}Sfl l$ w E DN E :D+Ydl:i,ff xnl?a'-?laH :' *
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLESRIJUSTICE ABHINAND KUMARSHAVILI
WRIT PETITIONNO:48870 F 201s
""*"",rf,roo,o, Ananth Reddv, s/olate chandra.fe$dy,Aqed88 years occ freedom iv',?"ii5i');'iili;r -s: io6 bi i- sr' o rd Arwa r' H vd e ra ba d
AND
.,.RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article226 of the constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the circumstances statedin the affidavitfiled therewith,the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order ordirection more particutarly one in the natureof Writ of |\4andamus declaring thevide proc. no. 52tCCt42|2OO9-FF(HC)dt.6-7-2009 and also proceedings no.11ZJ3l2OOg-FF(HC) d1.21-8-2012issued by the respondentno.1 as illegal, arbitrary, and violativeof principlesof naturaljustice andconsequentlyset aside the saidproceedings and furlherdirect the respondentno.1 to grantpensionto the petitioner on the basis of report ofthe respondentno.2 dt.27-6-2011and grant pension from the date of his application.
IANO:1O F 2019
Petition under Section 151 CPCpraying that in the circumstancesstated in the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, the High Court may bepleased to direct the respondent no, 1 to reconsider the claim of thepetitioner forgrant of Swatantra Sainik Samman Pension Scheme-1980 in view of report of the respondent no.2 dt.27 -6-2011, pending disposal of the Writ Petition in the interest ofjustice.
Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl. KOWTURU PAVAN KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent No. 1:SRl. N. RAJESHWAR RAO, ASST. SOLICITOR GENERAL
Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: GP FOR REVENUE
The Court made the following:
THf, HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SH,{V]LI
V/IIIT PETITION No.4887 of 2019
ORDER:
l. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner informed the Court that the writ petition has become infructuous.
SD/-K.SAILESHI
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY//
\
To,
SECTION OFFICER
1 One CC to Sri. KoMuru Pavan Kumar, Advocate tOpUCl
One Spare Copy.
Pl/
E
HIGH COURT
DATED:04/08/2021
ORDER
WP.No.4887 of 20'19
t
( ir {i<br>e,J 0? .EP2021 c-1
:
,y*9/
Dismissingthe WP As infructuous Without costs.
Ge'\e} @ %6'
Ananth Reddv
The Union of India
The State of Telangana
Abhinand Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court