The High Court closed W.P. No. 3788 of 2010, contesting non-supply of proceedings documents. Upon hearing, the court noted the respondent had complied with a prior interim order by supplying the documents, rendering further adjudication unnecessary.
The writ petition is closed without 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.
[3303 ]
HIGH COURTFOR THESTATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTYSECOND DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLESRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO
WRIT PETITloN NO: 3788 OF 2010
Between:
B.Shankar, S/o.Mallaiah,aged 55 years, Occ Welder, Rl/o. 5-3- 1 2317,Jeera,Secunderabad.
,...PETITIONER
AND
The Mandal Revenue Officer,Hayatnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District
.....RESPONDENT
Petition Under Anide226 of the constitutionof lndiapraying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavitfiled therewith,the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriatewrit, orderor direction, morein the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaringtheactionoftherespondenthereininnotfurnishingthecopyofthe proceedings as requested throughthe representative of the petitionerdated 09-07-2009' even after lapse ofmore than seven monthsas being illegal,arbitrary, and is in violation of principles of naturaljustice and fair playand consequently directthe respondentto forthwith furnish thedocuments requestedin the representation dated 09-07-2009.
I.A.N :1 OF 2010(WPMP.NO: 4933 OF2010)
PetitionUnderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesStatedinthe affidavit filed in supportof the petition, the High court may be pleasedto directthe respondenthereintofurnishtheproceedingsNo.G/3747l2003wherebythenamesof some thirdparties andclaimants were recordas requested through the representation dated 09-07-2009 forthwithand report compliance, pending disposal of the above writ petition.
Counsel for thePetitioner: SRI G.SAHITH, AOVOCATEFOR SRI V'RAMCHANDERGOUD
Counsel for the Respondent: AGPFOR REVENUE
The Court made thefollowingORDER
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO
WRIT PETITION No.3788 of 2O1O
ORDER
\
This writ petition is hled seeking following relief
"...issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more in the nature of writ of Mandamus deciaring the action of the respondent herein in not furnishing the copy of the proceedings as requested through the representation of the petitioner dated 09.7.2009 even after lapse of more than seven months as being iltegal, arbitrary and is in violation of principles of naturaljustice and fair play and consequently direct the respondent to forthwith fumish the documents requested in the representation dated 09.07 2009..."
-/
2
As a sequel,miscellaneous peLitions'pending if any'
shall standclosed'
//TRUECOPY//
SD/.C. PRAVEENKUMAR ; ASSISTANTREGIj,jTRAR / A/
SECTIONOFFICER
to ,. -*o CCs to GP For Revenue' High Court for the State of Telangana atHyderabad
z. to^u"lcto sri v.Ramchander Goud' Advocate[oPUC]
SA
BS w
HIGH COURT
DATED:2211112023
ORDER
1 g STAT$ o
ii
-t
looa1 19 [tt zui i': ,
'.);) )/
* DFSirrlr I.
WP.No.3788of 2010
CLOSINGTHE W.P
WTTHOUTCOSTS.
C.d.*l W---.ilp
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be closed without adjudication since the documents were already furnished pursuant to an interim order.
Whether any further order is required when compliance with the prior interim order has been established.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
B.Shankar
The Mandal Revenue Officer
J. Sreenivas Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
