Writ petition challenging refusal of religious minority status to an educational institution was dismissed as infructuous by the High Court of Telangana after petitioners counsel submitted that the cause of action did not survive for adjudication.
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.
[3303 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 3276 OF 2011
Between:
...PETITIONERS
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndiapraying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction one more in the nature of "Writ of Mandamus" declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not granting religious minority status to the 2nd petitioner institution for aperiod of threeyears as being illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional apart from being in violation of G.O.tt/ls. No.1 dated 16.01.2OO4 and consequentially direct the Respondent to grant minority status for a period of three years and permanent minority status thereafter to the 2nd petitioner institution
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP. NO: 4062 OF 20'11)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may bepleased to direct the Respondents to forthwith consider and pass orders on thepetitioners' representation dated 29.O1 -201'1 for grant of permanent minority status to the 2nd petitioner institution, pending the disposal of the writ petition
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S. NIRANJAN REDDY
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFA,RE
The Court made the following: ORDER
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENfVAS RAO
WRIT PETITION No.3276 of 2OLL
ORDER:
When the matter is taken up for hearing, Ms. Anjali, learned counsel representing Sri S. Niranjan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, fairly submit that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication.
In view of the above submission, the writ petition 1S
dismissed as infructuous.
Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.
SD/.N. SRIHARI ASSTSTANTIbGISTRAR //TRUECOPY// SECTION OFFICER
To'1. One CC to SRI S. NIRANJAN REDDYJdvo.cate^[OPUCI . i. i;; dd.i.-oiFon SociAlwELFARE,High court for the state ot Telangana. [OUT] 3. Two CD CoPies BN SW\ v
HIGH COURT
DATED:2110212023
(
j :--
.$
l' s
I + 9'//
,/
ORDER
WP.No.3276 of 2011
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
6
"t'"i
ot I s 23
s
Mumtaz Yaruddowla Wakt and Others
Govt. of A.P. and Others
J. Sreenivas Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
