Dismissed

Managing Committee Dargah Hzt. Khaja Syed v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Telangana HC18 Dec 2023WP/16718/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Hyderabad dismissed Writ Petition No. 16718 of 2009 and applications connected thereto for non-prosecution as the petitioner failed to appear or provide representation during the listing for dismissal hearings in December 2023.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition and pending miscellaneous applications dismissed for non-prosecution without costs.

Managing Committee Dargah Hzt. Khaja Syed… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³³⁰³ ]

¶2

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

¶3

[/ONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH^{DAY OF DECEIVIBER} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^SRI JUSTICE^{J. SREENIVASRAO}

¶6

WRIT PET ITION NO:^{16718 OF 2009}

¶7

Between:

¶8

tvlanaging Committee Dargah Hzt. Khaja^{Syed, GhulamRasool Sahebwith attached} Instituiioi and lands at Viltage Buru!pal[y,^{Revenue lrlandal, Vikarabad, District} Ranga Reddy, Rep. by its ?resident^{tVOhd,.l\4oizuddinChisti S/o. late tri'lohd.} Jamlluddin, A.ged a2^ybars, Occ ;^{Agriculture,R/o. VillageBurugpally,Revenue} lvlandal Vikarabad District Ranga^Reddy.

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Revenue DiyiSional^{Officer, Vikarabad Division, RangaReddy District.at} Vikarabad.

¶12

Khaja Qutubuddin Ansari, S/o.^Late Khaja^{Yousuf Ali Ansari, aged 50.years,} Occ; Business, R/o.^Village Burygupally^{Revenue tvlandal,Vikarabad, District} Ranga Reddy District.

¶13

.....RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution^{of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{the High Court may be} pleased to call for the record in the File No.Dl1226l2O06 from the^{office of the} respondent No.1 and the order dated 04-07-2009^{may be quashed and set aside} by issue of Writ of certiorari and any other appropriate^{Writ orderor directionin} the interest of^justice.

¶15

I.A.NO:1 OF 2009^(WVMP. NO: 3160^OF2009)

¶16

Between

¶17

'Khaja Qutubuddin Ansari, S/o. Late Khaia Yousuf Ali Ansari, aged-p0 years, Occ ; Business, R/o. Village Burugupally Revenue^{Mandal,Vikarabad, DiskictRanga} Reddy District.

¶18

.....2Nd RESPONDENT/PETITIONER

¶19

AND

¶20

Managing Committee Dargah Hzt. Khaja Syed, Ghulam Rasool Saheb with attached lnstitution and Iands at Village Burugpally, Revenue ltrlandal, Vikarabad, District Ranga Reddy, Rep. by its President MOhd.lt/oizuddin Chisti S/o. late t,4ohd. Jamaluddin, Aged 42 years, Occ ; Agriculture, R/o. Village Burugpally, Revenue lt/andal Vrkarabad District Ranga Reddy.

¶21

.....WRIT PETITIONER

¶22

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vikarabad Division, Ranga Reddy District. at Vikarabad.

¶23

....1't RESPONDENT IN W.P

¶24

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 vacate the Status Quo order granted on 13-8-2009 made in WP[4P No. 2194912009 in WP No.^'1 6718 of 2009.

¶25

|.A.NO:2 OF 2009^(WPMP.NO: 21949 OF 2009)

¶26

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 the order in Case No. D11226120O6 dated 04-07-2009 issued by the respondent No.1 in respect of Dargah Hazrath Ghualm Rasool Saheb and its properties at Village Burugupally, Revenue Mandal, Vikarabad District Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶27

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI MOHD GHULAM HUSSAIN

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR REVENUE

¶29

Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRI ABDUL MUQEETH QURESHI

¶30

The Court made the following ORDER

¶31

¶32

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENTVAS RAO

¶33

WRIT PETITION No.16718 of 2OO9

¶34

ORDER:

¶35

When the matter was taken up for hearing on 12.12.2023 , there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. To give one opportunity, the matter was posted to 18.12.2023 under the caption 'for dismissal'. In spite of the matter being listed under the caption 'for dismissal', today also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner in the morning and a-fternoon sessions. It appears that the petitioner is not having any interest to prosecute the matter.

¶36

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed for nonprosecution. No costs

¶37

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

¶38

closed.

¶39

SD/- P. CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT REGIS //TRUE COPY//

¶40

To,

¶41

SECTI N OFFICER

¶42

Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶43

One CC to SRt TVOHD GHULATV HUSSA|N, Advocate tOpUCl

¶44

One CC to SRI ABDUL IMUeEETH QURESH|, Advocate tOpUCI

¶45

Two CD Copies SA GJ

I i j l I I

HIGH COURT

DATED:1811212023

ORDER

e STAT€
I
1 B JAN 2$2[ o
oo

OE-< P,A1c

¶51

WP.No.16718 ot 2009

¶52

DISMISSING THE WP FOR NON.PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS

¶53

@G{'u' G,

Managing Committee Dargah Hzt. Khaja Syed v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Managing Committee Dargah Hzt. Khaja Syed v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Nazimuddin Farooqui Vs The State of A.P

Kandimalla Venkateswarlu Vs Sri.K.Ilambardi

Koppurapu Santoshini Vs Sri Dr. Shailander Kumar Jhosi

M/s New Steel City Merchants Welfare Society, Vs The Secretary (Revenue)

D. Satyanarayana Vs The Tahsildar

Mohd. Ayub., Vs Prl.Secy., Revenue Dept.,Hyd., and 2 Others