Partly allowed

K.Kondal Rao v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC14 Sept 2021WP/7367/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging proceedings of Land Reforms Tribunal was dismissed as withdrawn by the petitioner. An application for suspension of proceedings was rendered redundant. The Court vacated the interim order with liberty to pursue remedies before the Appellate Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition and remission application dismissed as withdrawn; interim order vacated; liberty granted to file appeal before Appellate Tribunal.

K.Kondal Rao Vs The State of Telangana — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

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

¶2

TUESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶5

WR|T PET|T|ON NO: 7362 eF 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

K.Kondal Rao, S/o late Sri K.Narayana Rao, Aged about 64 years, Occ. Busin ess. Rl/o H.No.1-89, Kukatpally, Hyderaba'd.

¶8

,.PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

1 I1:-Sl?lg_"J Iglansana, FSq^{ey its.speciat Chief Secretary,Revenue} uepanment, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶11

2 The- Chairman, Land Reforms Tribunal Cum - RDO Malkajgiri, Medchal _ Malkajgiri District, Office at Malkajgiri, Hyderabad.-

¶12

J The Special Tahsildar, Land Reforms, Office at RDO Malkajgiri, Ivledchal Malkajgiri District.

¶13

4 K.Venkata Ramaiah, S/o Subbaiah, Died per LRs.

¶14

5 Koduru Arjun Rao, S/o Late Koduru Srinivasa Rao, Aged 4g years, Occ. private Employee, Rl/o Gudiwada, Krishna District.

¶15

6 Koduru Subramany_eswara Rao, S/o late Srinivasa Rao, Aged 46 years, Occ. Private Employee, Fl/o Gudiwada, Krishna District.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

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 nature of writ of Certiorari calling for records in Proceeding CC.No.702lM/ 1975, dt.1811212019 passed by the 2nd Respondent, and consequently set aside the same.

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased to suspend the operation of Proceedings in CC.No.702lM/1S75, d1.1811212019^passed by the 2nd Respondent, during pendency of writ^petition. Otheruvise the Petitioner will be^put to irreparable loss and injury.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. G MADHUSUDHAN^REDDY

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.¹ to 3: GP FOR^REVENUE

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 5 & 6: SRl.^{A. SRINIVAS}

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No. 4: NONE APPEARED

¶24

The Court made the following: order

¶25

THE^{HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A'ABHISHEKREDDY} oNNo^{.7367of 2021} WRITP

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

ReddY,^{learnedcounscl forthe} Sri^{G Madhusudhan} petitioner,^{addresseda letter dated 13 09 2021 to the Registry} seeking^{withdrawal of the writ petitionwith liberty to the petitioner} to avail^{the remedy of filing an appeal before the Appellate} Tribunal.^{He aiso made an endorsement on the writ petitionto} that effect.

¶28

In view^{of the above'the WritPetitionis clismissed as}

¶29

withdrawn^{granting liberty as soughtfor'}

¶30

Consequently,^{the interim order granted by this Court on} 16 .O4 .2021^{stands vacated automatically'}

¶31

Pendingmiscellaneouspetitions,ifany,shallstandclosed

¶32

There shall^{be no order as to costs'}

¶33

ASSIIJTANSD/..T.KRI^?sl!"Hi*

¶34

//TRUE^COPY//

¶35

SECTION^OFFTCER

¶36

To 1. qti"#]1":;:;'::'"''"ansana(oUr) 2. illH::"ffi 2 4 i1:ggl*iif E . One^{SPare CoPY}

¶37

P M

¶38

HIGH^COURT

¶39

DATED:^{1 4 10912021}

¶40

1t,r: 51AiC
e 7.
C)
o
rJ 1$ sEPtttl
+ .!'
.\ -'n ,- --.'
"i-

¶41

ORDER

¶42

WP.No.7367 of 2021

¶43

Dismissing the WP As withdrawn Without costs.

¶44

K.Kondal Rao v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Kondal Rao v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chinthalapally Veera Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Kondapalkala Hanmantha Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Kanudukuri Ahalya Vs The State of Telangana

Smt.S.Sankuri Shailaja, And 2 Others Vs State of Telangana, And 3 Others

K.Naveen Kumar, Vs The State of Telangana

M. Shankar Vs The State of Telangana