Court dismissed Writ Petition No. 7124 of 2023 and connected miscellaneous petitions as infructuous upon submission that the case no longer survives for adjudication by the petitioner's counsel.
The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous. Miscellaneous petitions pending if any, shall stand closed. Dismissed 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 COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO
WRIT PETITION NO:7124 OF 2023
Between:
M/s. Tirumala Saw Mill, Rep. by its Proprietor G. Srinivasa Rao, S/o .Narayana, Aged about 6O years, Occ Business, R/o Lingala Village, Kamepally Mandal, Khammam District.
...PETITIONER
AND
..RESPONDENTS
'Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate wnt, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent Nos.3 and 6 in not issuing transit permits to the petitioner for the transport of material as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutiona t, and violate of Articles 14, 19(g) of the Constitution. of lndia and TS Transit Permit Rules, 1970 and consequen y direct the respondent Nos. 3 and 6 to issue transat permits to the petitioner according to TS Transit Permit Rules, 1970.
lA NO: 1 OF 2023
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavrt filed rn support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent Nos. 3 and 6 to issue transit permits to the petitioner according to TS Transit Permit Rules, 1970,pending disposal of the above writ petrtron
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. NAGESHWAR RAO PUJARI
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR FORESTS
The Court made the following: ORDER
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENTVAS RAO
WRIT PETITION No.7424 of 2023
OR.DER:
When the matter is taken_ up for hearing, Sri Srinath Reddy, Iearned counsel appearing on behalf of M/s.Disha Law Firm, for the petitioner fairly submits that the camse in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication.
In view of the above submission, this u.rit petition is
dismissed as infructuolrs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any,
shall stand closed.
SD'.V.KAVITHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY'/ sEcnoft-oFFtcER
To, '1 . One CC to Sri. Nageshwar Rao Pujarr, Advocate toPljql 2 Two CCs to GP foiForests,High Court for the State of l-elangana. [OUT] 3. Two CD Copies
TJ tls
HIGH COURT
DATED:0610412023
ORDER
<s
\s-
l.:
d
\
.*i;
WP.No.7424 of 2023
DISMISSING THE W.P
AS INFRUCTUOUS
WITHOUT COSTS.
U
\ \r
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenges the refusal to grant transit permits by forest officers under TS Transit Permit Rules, 1970 in violation of Articles 14 and 19(g)?
Whether the High Court should have issued a mandamus declaring the action of respondents illegal and arbitrary?
3 provisions across 3 enactments
M/s. Tirumala Saw Mill, Rep. by its Proprietor G. Srinivasa Rao
The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests
The Forest Divisional Officer
Justice J. Sreenivas Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
