The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by several petitioners challenging a land mutation order. The petition was dismissed for non-prosecution/default as the petitioners failed to appear or present representation after multiple listings.
The writ petition was dismissed without costs for non-prosecution/default.
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.
[3302]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION NO: 1848 0F 2009
Between:
...PETITIONERS
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents proposing to mutate the names of Respondent No.4 and 5 as arbitrary and illegal and violative of Article 14, 21 and 3004 of the constitution of lndia and also of section 4 and 5 and Rule 13 of A.P Rights in Land and pattadar pass books Act j971 and consequently declare the issuance of Memo vide Lr.No.F/107i09 dated 19-12009 issued by Respondent No.3 to all the petitioners as arbitrary and illegal.
l.A. NO: 1 OF 20011 P. NO: 2332 OF 2009
Petition un< er Section 15'1 cPC praying that in tht: :ircumstances stated in the affidavit file J in support of the petition, the High cc ur1 may be pleased to srAY all further rroceedings in pursuance of the Mem ) vide Lr. No. F/i 07109 dated'l 9-'1-2009 issued by Respondent No.3.
Counsel for the Pe titioners: M/s. B.H.R.CHOUDARY (NOT PRESENT)
Counsel for the Re spondent Nos.1 to 3: Gp FOR REVENU E:
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5: -
The Court made th : foltowing: ORDER
THE HONOTIRABLE SRI JT]STICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.l of 2009
ORDER:
This petition is coming for hearing since 2009. On 26.10.2022, 09.77.2022 and 25.71.2022, when the matter was called, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners, and therefore the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption "for Dismissal,,. Even today, when the matter is called, there is no representation. It seems that the petitioners are not interested to prosecute this case.
3 Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed.
To,
SD/. K.SAILESHI DEPUTYdEGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
1 One CC to MiS. B.H.R.CHOUDARY, Advocate IOPUCI 2 Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court toi ttre Siite of Tetangana at Hyderabad[OUT] .) Two CD Copies BSR KKS
6sR
HIGH COUF T
DATED: 0911212022
t'-
.;a
I
I
\l
sCQ'
ORDER
WP.No.1848 of 2009
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION
FOR NON.PI TOSECUTION/DEFAULT
WITHOUT CI)STS
6
1 N ,br
sL(
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition filed for declaring land mutation arbitrary and illegal should be allowed or dismissed in light of the petitioner's default in appearing.
Sri M.Shankar
Sri M.Rama
The Government of A.P.
Sri Mongre Ganapathi
K. Sarath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
