Dismissed

Parmalu Somaiah, v. The Additional Agent to State Government and Project

Telangana HC28 Dec 2022WP/28923/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226 as infructuous. The court was informed that a revision petition challenging the same impugned order had been admitted, rendering the present writ application for condonation of delay and declaration of illegality redundant.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous with no order as to costs.

Parmalu Somaiah, Vs The Additional Agent to… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

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

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO :28923 OF 2008

¶6

Between:

¶7

lq.qgl,l^{Somaiah, S/o. Parrnula PetdaGangaram,} Mahar (SC) Agriculture, Rl/o.Thalamadri Vg., lchoda Madnat, Aditabad Distiict.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

1 The Additional Agent to State Government and project, Officer, l.T.D.A. Adilabd, Hqrs. Utnoor, Adilabad district.

¶11

2 I|qSpgqgt^{Deputy Coilector (TU{),, O/o. Speciat Deputy} Coilector (Tribat Welfare) Hqrs Utnoor, Adilabab Di;trict

¶12

.7 The Tahsihar, Asifabad Mandal,, lchoda Mandal, Adilabad District.

¶13

4 The.Special Deputy Tahsitdgr.(f .W),, O/o. Speciat Deputy Coilector (Tribal Welfare) Utnoor, Adilabae Distiict.

¶14

5 Hari Singh,, S/o. Vasram, R/o. Talamadri Village, lchoda Mandal, Adilabd District.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High'cJurt may be pleased to issue any appropriate writ, order or direction more in the natuie of writ of Mandamus declaring the order passed by the^.1.r respondent vide case No.A4ILTR/2008 dated 20.i0.2008 dismissing the appeal fited by the petitioners on the ground that there is no sufficient cause for condoning'the delay of B months 23 days in filing the appeal against the order paJsed by the 2ni Respondent dated 5-10-2007 in LTR case No.TWA21606196 ordering for ejectment of the petitioners from the lands bearing Sy.No.36/part extent Acl4-00 situated at ralamadri Village, lchoda Mandal, Adilabad Districi and to restore the same to the transferor alleging that there in violation of section 3(1)(a) of the Andhra Pradesh schedured Areas Land rransfer Reguration'^'i9'ss rrw amendment regulation I of 1 970 as illegal, arbitrary, and unfustified in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶17

l.A. NO: 1OF 20 O }(WF'MP. NO: 37833 OF 2008)

¶18

Petition unr ler Section 151 CPC praying that in tht, ,,:ircumstances stated in the affidavit file J in support of the petition, the High c:( u11 may be pleased to fix an early date fr r final hearing of the above Writ pr:titior.r

¶19

l.A. NO:^'l OF 201( MP" NO: 25582OF 2016

¶20

Petition unc er Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file I in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 2080 days in filing set aside petition

¶21

l.A. NO: 2OF 201t PMP. NO: 48358 OF 2016

¶22

Petition und:r Section 151 CPC praying that in the c rcumstances stated in the affidavit filer in support of the petition, the High Co lrl mi:y be pleased to bring on record th: Respondents 6 to^'1 t herein as lega t.eirs of Respondent No.S i e. late Hari liingh in the above writ Petition.

¶23

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017 WPMP. NO: 26771 OF 2017\

¶24

Petition und, )r Section 151 CPC praying that^jn the o rcumstances stated in the affidavit filec in support of the petition, the High Cotrrl may be pleased to order substitute se vice in the above Writ Petition in so far ,:; Respondents 6 to '1 I are concerned.

¶25

Counsel for the Pe itioner : SRI V.RAVI KIRAN RAO

¶26

Counsel for the Re ;pondents : GP FOR SOCIAL WELFA,[IE. Counsel for the Rer ;pondents : BHANU MURTHY BALA The Courl made thr following :ORDER

¶27

¶28

THE HON'BLE^{SMT. JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI}

¶29

WRIT PETITION^{No.28923 of 2008}

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

This Writ Petition^{has been filed seekinga Writ of Mandamus'} declaring the^{order passed by the lst resPondent vide Case} No.A4/LTR/20O8,^{dated 20.10.2008,dismissing the appeal filed by} the petitioner^{on the ground that there is no sufhcient causefor} condoning the^{delay of 8 months 23 days in hling the appeal} \ against the order^{passed by the 2"d respondent dated O5'10'2007in} LTR Case No.TWA2/6O6/96^{orderingfor ejectment of the petitioner} from the lands^{inSy.No.36/partextent Ac'4-00' situatedat} Talamadri village,^{Ichoda Mandal, Aditabad District' as illegaland} arbitrary and to^{pass such other order or orders'}

¶32

t 2.Atthetimeofhearing,thelearnedcounselforthepetitioner submitted that the^{Writ Petition was filed for not condoningthe} delay in frling the^{appeal, but subsequently,the petitioner has hled} a Revision Petition^{rt'hich has been admitted and therefore, this} application for^{condonation of delay in filing an appeal has become} infructuous. I

¶33

¶34

¶35

PMD,.I W.P.No.28923 of 2008

¶36

Accordin5 ly, the Writ petition is dismisse:ri Infructuous.

¶37

There shali be ro order as to coss.

¶38

Miscellanr:ous applications, if any pendin?, shall also stand closed.

¶39

SD/. .^{I]II ...{DFIA} SEKHAR RAO ASSIST4AT REGISTRAR

,TRUE COPY//

siic?ror.r oFFrcER

To, 1. The Additior al Agent to State Govemment and Pro.1ect, Officer, l.T.D.A. Adilabd, Hqr s. Utnoor, Adilabad district.

¶44

1. The Special Deputy Collector (TW),, O/o. Special DeprrLy Collector (Tribal Welfare) Hq s Utnoor, Adilabae District.

¶45

The Tahsildirr, Asifabad Mandal,, lchoda Mandal, Adilebad District. 4. The Special Deputy Tahsildar (TW),, O/o. Special Dep,rti, Collector (Tribal Welfare) Utr oor, Adilabae District.

¶46

Hari Singh,, 3/o. Vasram, R:/o. Talamadri Village, lchoc a Mandal, Adilabd District.

¶47

One CC to liRl V.RAVI KIRAN RAO, Advocate [OPUC:] 7. Two CCs to 3P FOR SOCIAL WELFARE, High Courl lor the State of Telangana. [ 3UT]

¶48

One CC to S RI BHANU MURTHY BALA, Advocate [O[,UC]

¶49

Two CD Cop ies

¶50

'10. One Spare C opy KSR GJP Bsh

(

HIGH COURT

DATED:2811212022

ORDER

WP.No.2892li of 2008

1 H-= s
,z( aA
) 1 6 FEB ?I?1
5r.
t.'&
,/

¶59

WRIT PETITI()N IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTIJOUS.

¶60

13^Gsirs o,1,L

Parmalu Somaiah, v. The Additional Agent to State Government and Project

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parmalu Somaiah, v. The Additional Agent to State Government and Project

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Rajya Laxmi Saw Mill Vs The State of Telangana

The Primary Fishermen Cooperative Society Vs The State of Telangana

Damera Rakesh Vs The State of Telangana

Dandamudi Keshava Narayana Vs The Special Deputy Collector(Tw)

Sri. Manja Narsing and another Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

Sri. Danavath Ramu Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others