This High Court order dismisses the pending writ petition due to failure of the petitioners to comply with the earlier conditional order dated 16.04.2015 passed by this Court against the third respondent.
Writ petition dismissed against third respondent; lapsing leads to dismissal against all respondents; no costs.
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.
tI
[3303 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYOERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE IWENTYSIXTH DAY OF APRIL iwo rHousRND ANDTWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVASRAO
w RIT PETITION NO:31718 OF 2!E
Between:
AND
lsince the Conditional Order of theCourt dtd 16-04-2015has not been i:omplied with, the defaultclause ofthe saidordel has been given -effectto, and itre WP accordingly standsdasmissedas against RespondentNo.3)
...RESPONDENTS
Petrtron under A rltcle 226 of the Constitutionof lndia prayingthat rn the circumstances statedin the affidavitfiled therewith, the High Court may be pleased to tssue a Writ, Order or direction morein the nature of Mandamus declarrng the action of theRespondents in entertainingAppeal No 212011lA4 and contrnuing rts enquiry againstthe orders passed by the primary authority in Case No.7234 and 7235 dated15-7-1983 aftet28 years and in spite of the orders passed by the High Court in W P.M.P No.18605 of2009 in W-P.Nos.14'197 of 2009 dated16-7-2o)g suspendingtheG O.Rt.No.1001 Revenue (Ser.1/1) dated 2-5-2008 conferringpowers of the Director of settlementson the first respondent as rllegal arbitrary and wrthouthaving any powerandjurisdiction consequently declare that no appealcan be entertainedagainst the orders passed by the primary authority in Case Nos. 7234 and 7235 dated15-7-'1983in respect of Sy Uos zSlt Z and75l'13to an extent of 0.05 and 0 05 hares equivalenlto 25 cents srtuated at Bhadrachalamvillage and Mandal, Khammam District
I.A. NO: 1OF 2012(WPMP. NO: 40457 OF 20121
Petition under section 151 cpc prayrng that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, ine uign court may be pleased to issue an interim direction directing the first resiondent staying aI further proceedings in respect of Appear No.2r2o11tA4 so far as the ]-ands of the petitioner is concerned in sy.No.7sll2 a^d r5t13 to an extent of 0.05 and 0.05 hares equivalent to 25 cents situated at Bhadracharam Vilage and Mandar of Khammam District, pending disposal of the writ petation
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. p V RAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: Gp FOR SOCTAL WELFARE
Counsel forthe Respondent No.2: Gp FOR REVENUE
The Court made the folowing: ORDER
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENWASRAO
W.P. No.31718 OF 2Or2
ORDER:
When the matter is takenup for consideration,itis brought to the notice of thisCourtthat this writ petition is dismissed against contcstingrespondent for non-compliance of the conditional orderdated16.04.2015 passed by this Court.
As a scquel, misccllzrneouspetitions, pending if any,
shall stand closcd.
SD/.V.KAVITHA
ASSISTANT REGJS.RAR //TRUE copy//
sEcild.l oFFrcER
BS Prnq,
I
HIGH COURT
DATED:2610412023
ORDER
WP.No.31718 of 2012
sr-A,-E
1
,i
[ 3 Juil ?[8 I
i,
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS
f9l^., "*l'
Gottimukkala Vruswanadha Raju
Gottimukkala Satyanarayan Prasad
The Director of Settlements and Project Officer
The Tahsildar
Thama Krishna Rao
J. Sreenuvas Rao
V. Kavitha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
