In W.P. No. 39081 of 2022, the Acting Chief Justice of the Telangana High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order of the Telangana State Human Rights Commission. The court held that the cause did not survive for adjudication, rendering the writ frivolous.
Petitioner's application was dismissed as infructuous 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.
I
[33681
H]GH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA ATHYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICEABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUST]CE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWARRAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 39081 OF 2022
Between:
Mr. Asif Shaikh, S/o GhulamuddinlvlaciboolShaikh, Aged about- 57 years, Occ- Director, Fl/o.- Plot No.24, Road No.69,NandgiriHills, JubileeHills Hyderabad - 37.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS;
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filedtherewith,the High Court maybe pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particulady a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records in HRC No.322 of 2022 dated 30-09-2022pending before Respondent No.3 and setting aside the same as the same is illegal, void, against principles of natural justiqe, violative of Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia.
lA NO: 1 OF 2022
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may bepleasedto stay the proceedrngs vide HRC No 322 of 2022 dt 3010512022 before the Respondent No.3, irr respect of the complaintpurported to be issued by the Respondent No.4 which in turn r,t,as allegedly issued on thepremise of violation of human Rights.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.VENKATESH
Counsel for the Respondent No.'l: M/s. B.KAVITHA YADAV, SC FOR CENTRAL GOVT.,
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: NONE APPEARED
Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI A.SAMIR KUMAR REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI R.CHANDRASHEKAR REDDY
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEFJUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND
[ION'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJI|SIIWAR RAO
W.P.No.3 8t oF 2022
ORDER: 4'", ri, e lfon'bta the Acting ChiefJustice Abhinan(r Kunt.t Shzvirl) \X4ren the matter is taken up for hcaring, leamed
counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the cause in this writ petition does not surwive for
adjudication and hence, the writ petition has become infructuous.
Recording the said submission, the S7rit Petition is
dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitioru, rt any, pending shall stand
closed.
//TRUE COPY//
SD/- K.SREERAMA ruu/rxv' ASSISTANT REcrgtRAR SECTION #r,"r*
To,
HIGH COURT
DATED: 2010712023
ORDER
WP.No.39081 of 2022
:i
iiii; '
j; .
I- \i
!-ir- 1E AUE2S j
.!
ig5.*'..,'t;1,'
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION
AS INFRUCTUOUS,
WITHOUT COSTS
g,
Mr. Asif Shaikh
Union of India
National Human Rights Commission
Telangana State Human Rights Commission
Mohammed Mohiuddin
Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
