Dismissed

Penna Cement Industries Limited v. State of Telangana and 6 Others

Telangana HC7 Apr 2022WP/11991/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the laying of a road via writ petition seeking quashing of a G.O. under Article 226 and injunction under Section 151 CPC. The court dismissed the petition as infructuous because the road laying was already completed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition under Article 226 and Section 151 CPC dismissed as infructuous; no order as to costs.

Penna Cement Industries Limited Vs State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYTWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE A.ABTISHEK REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 1't991 OF 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

Penna Cement lndustries Limited, Ganeshpahad (v), Damarcherla lr,4andal, Nalgonda District. Head office situated at Laxmi Nivas 705, Road No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-34 Rep. by its General Manager (Works), Shaik IVahaboob Basha s/o. Shaik Nabi Sahib, aged about 53 years.

...PETITIONER

AND

State of Telangana, rep. by Principal Secretary, Tdbal Welfare (STSDF) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶13

The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat Buildlngs, Hyderabad.

¶14

The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, lndustries and Commerce Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶15

District Tribal Welfare Officer, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District.

¶16

District Panchayat Officer, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District.

¶17

Superintendent Engineer, Panchayat Raj Circle, Nalgonda.

¶18

Kunduri Srinivas Reddy (Contractor), Damarcherla Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

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 [Vlandamus declaring the item 6 of Annexure to the G.O.RT No. 358 Tribal Welfare (STSDF) Department dt. 4lSl201B is illegal and violation of principles of natural justice and Article 14 of the Constitution of lndia and I consequently direct the respondents not to lay road from Sunyapahad village

¶21

PalakaveeduMandal,SuryapetaDistricttoGaneshpahadvillage'Damarcherla N/landal, Nalgonda^District.

¶22

IA NO: 1 0F 2021

¶23

Petition under^{Section 151 cPC prayingthatin the circumstances statedin} theaffidavitfiledinSupportofthepetition,theHighCourtmaybepleasedto suspend the^{item 6 of Annexure to the G.O.RT No. 358 Tribal welfare (STSDF)} Department^{dt. 4l9l2O1B.}

¶24

IA NO: 20F 2021

¶25

Petition under^{Section'1 51 CPC prayingthatin the circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed^{in supportof the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct} the respondents^{not to lay road from Sunyapahad village Palakaveedu lt4andal,} Suryapeta^{District to} Ganeshpahad^{village, DamancherlaMandal, Nalgonda} District.

¶26

Counsel for the^{Petitioner:SRl.PASHAM RAVINDRAREDDY}

¶27

Counsel for the^{Respondent No's.1 & 4: GP FOR SOGIALWELFARE}

¶28

Counsel for the^{Respondent No's.2,5 & 6: GP FORPANCHAYAT RAJ}

¶29

Counsel for^{the RespondentNo.3:GP FOR INDUSTRIESAND COMMERCE} DEPARTMENT

¶30

Counsel forthe^{RespondentNo.7: NONE APPEARED}

¶31

The Court made^{the following: ORDER}

¶32

.'/,, ,/ ,/

¶33

TI{E HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A,ABHISHEK REDDY

¶34

WRIT PETITION No.11991 of 2O2L

¶35

ORDER:

¶36

The present writ petition is filed seeking to direct the respondents not to lay road from Sunyapahad Village, Palakaveedu Mandal, Suryapet District, to Ganeshpahad Village, Damarcherla Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶37

Heard. Perused the record.

¶38

A counter has been filed by respondent No.4-District^Tribal Welfare Officer, Nalgonda, specifically stating that laying of^the road has already completed on 1O.06.2021.

¶39

In view of the specific stand taken in the counter, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication.

¶40

Therefore, lhe Writ Petition is dismissed as inliuctuous.

¶41

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶42

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶43

SD/-G.SIREESHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /- //TRUE COPYII

¶44

SECTION OFFICER

¶45

To, 1. One CC to SRI. PASHAIV RAVINDRA REDDY Advocate [OPUC]

¶46

fwo CCs to GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE,High Court for the State of

¶47

Telangana. [OUT]

¶48

Two CCs to GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ,High Court^for the^Stateof Telangana. [OUT]

¶49

Two CCs to GP FOR INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT, ,High^{Court for the State of Telangana.} [OUTI

¶50

Two CD Copies

¶51

One Spare Copy.

GB BS 0k,/ Y/

HIGH COURT

DATED:0710412022

ORDER

IE
&
A'
&
.-{
f
*.
r$

WP.No.11991 of²⁰²¹

DISMISSING^{THE WP}

AS INFRUCTUOUS

WITHOUT COSTS.

xdN"

Penna Cement Industries Limited v. State of Telangana and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Penna Cement Industries Limited v. State of Telangana and 6 Others

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

Kedermal Vs State of Telangana

G.Raghotham Reddy Vs Sri Suresh Kumar

Sandhya Constructions and Estates Private Limited Vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (Ghmc)

Mohammed Munawar Khan Vs The State of Telangana

Smt.Kamala Kumari Vs Panyala Narsimha Goud

M/s Sri Venkatasai Enclave Welfare Association Vs The Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company and 4 others