Disposed

Sri. Satyapal Goud Kandikanti v. The Government of India

Telangana HC22 Aug 2023WP/19451/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the Regional Passport Officer, Nizamabad, to dispose of his passport application dated 15.10.2018. The Court directed the authority to consider the application and pass appropriate orders within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's passport application dated 15.10.2018 and pass appropriate orders within three weeks.

Sri. Satyapal Goud Kandikanti Vs The Government of… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

132521

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD} (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY ,THE^{TWENTY SECONDDAY OF AUGUST} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY THREE}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{MRS JUSTICESUREPALLINANDA}

¶6

WRIT PETITIO N NO:1⁹⁴⁵ 1 oF 2023

¶7

Between

¶8

Sri. SatvaPal^{GoudKandikanti,} S/o S hivaraj Goud^Kandikanti, Aged about 47 veais. Occ^Business,R/o H.No. 6-1 1-5,^Namdewvada' Nizamabad, Nizamabad District^{- 503 002.}

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The Government^{of lndia, Repby its Principal secretaryMinistry of external} affairs, New^Delhi,lndia

¶12

2 The Reoional ;i'E-'6'-=3i:'jEi ti*""L,^{pass port office, 'pi"giti i Rep r'lbs''|.' Near-Kapila Hotel' Hvderabad by its Regionalpass port officer'SituatedRoad'} Nizamabad,^{NizamabadDistrict-}

¶13

3 The State^{of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretarv Homedepartment} Secretariat^{Buitding,AnXnA]iaiin,'fiU"'rV,-iVO"rrbad,T'elangana State.}

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under^{Article 226 o'f lhe Constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstancesstatedintheaffidavitfiledtherewith,theHighCourtmaybe pleased to issue^{writ or direction moreparticularlyone in nature writ of} Mandamus or^{direction to the respondentNo' 2 to consider the pass port} applicationNo.HY406'1572103118,Dated15'l020lBofthepetitionerand Consequently^{directthe Respondent No' 2 to issuepassportto the petitioner'}

¶16

IA NO :1 OF^2O23

¶17

Petition under^{Section151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated} intheaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighCourtmaybepleasedto direct the^{respondent No 2 issue pass port to the petitionerin pursuanceof the}

¶18

application No. HY4061572103118, Dated 15.10 2018 by considering the oral explanation submitted by the petitioner.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRl. D RAGHAVULU

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : Ms. THAKUR ROOPA SINGH, SC

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : GP FOR HOME

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

¶24

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE^{SUREPALLINANDA}

¶25

WRIT P ETITION^No.1 4SL OF 2023

¶26

ORDER

¶27

' Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms.Thakur Roopa^{Singh, learned StandingCounsel} appearing on^{behalf of respondentNos'l and 2 and} learned Government^{Pleader for Home appearingon} behalf of resPondent^No.3.

¶28

The limited^{relief the petitioner seeks in the presentwrit} petition is a direction^{to the 2nd respondentto issue passport} in pursuance to the petitioner's application No.HY4061572103118^{dated 15'10'2018'Accordingly'the} writ petition^{is disposed of directing the 2nd respondentto} consider the^{petitioner's application No'HY4601572103118} dated 15.10.2018^{and passappropriate ordersin accordance} to law within a^{periodof three (03) weeks from the dateof} receipt of copy^{of this order and duly communicatingthe} decision^{to the petitioner'It is however observedthat if the} 2nd respondent^{authoritycalls for any required documentsin} deciding^{the petitioner's application No'HY4601572103118} dated^{15.10.2018, the petitioneris directedto co-operate and}

¶29

¶30

;

¶31

furnish the same to the 2nd respondent. However, there shall

¶32

be no order as to costs

¶33

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ

¶34

Petition, shall stand closed.

¶35

SD/.A.V.S.^PRASAD ASSIST4NJ^REGISTRAR //TRUE coPY// s$Proru oFFtcER

¶36

To, 1. The Principal^{secretary Ministryof externalaffairs' Government of lndia'New} Delhi, lndia.lndia.

¶37

Delhi, lndia.lndia.

¶38

1. The Reqional^{pass port officer, Regional pass port office 5-6-33' JB Towers'} ' p''';;;Y'il6"I, N! Jixiiiil;iti;i'Hi;'5bao'noao'^{N iza m a bad'N izamabad} District-

¶39

District-

¶40

1. The Principal^{SecretaryHome} .department^{State-ofTelangana'Secretariat} " a;iioino. BhxR Bhavan, libertv' Hvderabad' Telangana State'

¶41

4 il;ed'6'biii.b^{nAchnVULU,Advocatg} Lo.lqgl i 5li" dd i" vi.^{rrtnxun noopn sINGH'sc loPUCl}

¶42

Two CD^CoPies

¶43

¶44

BS /

HIGH^GOURT

DATED:22^tOBl2023

{ I f] AT
rsl
1 $ HUB I
oft)
<br>

¶50

ORDER

¶51

WP.No.19451^{of 2023}

¶52

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WTHOUT COSTS.

¶53

Sri. Satyapal Goud Kandikanti v. The Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Satyapal Goud Kandikanti v. The Government of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Andhe Naga Sonali Vs State of Telangana

Smt.Maimuna Khatoon Vs The State of Telangana

Md. Zaki Uddin, Sec-Bad. Vs C.E.O., Secunderabad Cantonment Board, Sec-Bad. and Ano.

P. Srujith Reddy Vs Reserve Bank of India

Kakarla Baby Meghana Vs Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited

M. Srinivasa Rao Vs The Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana State Ltd.