Dismissed

Puli Venkatesham v. Telangana State Election Commission Represented by its Secretary

Telangana HC13 Sept 2024WP/11927/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order declaring the petitioner ineligible for elections. The court ruled the cause of action survived by the time of filing. The order was made infructuous as the three-year ineligibility period had elapsed.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal of the writ petition as infructuous; no order as to costs.

Puli Venkatesham Vs Telangana State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁰² ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 11927 OF 2018

¶7

Between:

¶8

Puli Venkatesham, S/o. Late Kommuraiah, Aged about 55 years,' Occ Agric ulture, Garrepalli Village, Sulthanabad MandJt, peddapalli Disirict

¶9

AND

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

Telang3na Slate Election C_ommission Represented by its Secretary, 1st Floor, DTCP Building, Opp PTt Building, A.C.Guards, Hyd'erabad-500004'

¶12

The District collector and District Etection Authority,^'peddapalli District at Peddapalli. Telangana State.

¶13

a Il^g .9,.rt!.1^{PanchayatOfficer. Peddapaili Districtat peddapaili(postand} District). Telangana State.

¶14

4 The Mandal Parishad Development Officer/Assistant Election Authoritv.' Mandal Parishad office at sulthanabad (post and [r,4andat) peddapalli Districtl

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the impugned proceedings No. 31 6/T5EC-PR-PDP 12017 -(1250), dated 1 2-01 -2Oj B passed by the Respondent No. 1 a arbitrary, illegal and violation of the principles of natural justice and equity arm also violation of the Article^'14 of the constitution of lndia and consequently set aside the same in the interest of justice and equity lA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶17

Petition under Section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant interim suspersion of the operation of the impugned order bearing No.

¶18

31 6/T5EC-PR -PDP 12017 -(1250), dated^{1 2-01 -2013 passed by the Respondent} No. 1 , pending disposal of the Writ Petition in the interest of^{justice and equity} lA NO: 2 OF 2018

¶19

Between:

¶20

The District Collector and District Election Authority,^Peddapalli District^at Peddapalli. Telangana State.

¶21

The District Panchayat Officer, Peddapalli^District at^{Peddapalli (Post and} ....PETTIIONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶22

AND

¶23

Puli Venkatesham, S/o. Late Kommuraiah, Aged about 55^years,Occ Agriculture, Garrepalli Village, Sulthanabad N/andal, Peddapalli District

¶24

....PETITIONER/RESPONDENT

¶25

Telangana State Election Commission Represented by its Secretary, 1st Floor, DTCP Building, Opp PTI Building, A.C.Guards, Hyderabad-500004

¶26

The lVlandal Parishad Development Officer/Assistant^{Election Authority,} Ivlandal Parishad office at Sulthanabad^(Post and Mandal) Peddapalli District.

¶27

.....RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶28

(Respondent Nos.2&3 are not necessary parties in this petition)

¶29

Petition under Section 15't CPC^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be^pleased to vacate the interim orders dated 10.04.2018^passed in lA No.1/2018 in W.P.No. 1192712018 and dismiss the above writ^petition

¶30

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. RAMACHANDAR RAO VEMUGANTI

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1&2: SRI P. SUDHEER RAO

¶32

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3&4: AGP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT

¶33

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶34

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.11927 OF zOLa

¶35

ORDER:

¶36

Heard.

¶37

This Writ Petition is filed^questioning the^impugned Proc.No.3 l6ITSEC-PR-PDP^{-2O 17} -(l250l dated^{12.O 1.201 8} passed by the respondent No. 1 declaring the^petitioneras ineligible for a period of three^{yearsfrom the date of order} to contest in any elections to be^{held lor any post underthe} provisions of Telangana Panchayat Raj Act,^1994.

¶38

As the above said^{periodu'as elapsed by 11-O1.2021,} the cause in the Writ Petition does^{not survive and the Writ} Petition has become infructuous.

¶39

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is^dismissedas i.rfr.-..t ror". No order as to costs.

¶40

As sequel to it, Miscellaneous^{Pctitions pending, if} any, shall stand closed.

¶41

sD/.N'^{ct1^13#I?fts&mR} /[RUE^coPY/t )( SECTiON^OFFICER

¶42

To, ::J:::? '.'" : ilf*#i#imer:,^milu"tffi BM \ I' GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:1310912024

ORDER

WP.No.11927 of 2018

B 1 H E s lA
o
I J .t o
o
1/ DEt, 2iJZ1
a
2,
*
i T a;o

¶48

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTOUS WITHOUT COSTS o\A-

¶49

2t 11/ -lcfio-t,

Puli Venkatesham v. Telangana State Election Commission Represented by its Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Puli Venkatesham v. Telangana State Election Commission Represented by its Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Muthumulla Maha Siva Laxmi Vs The State of Telangana

Baddam Lakshma Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary

Manikanta Agro Tech., Vs The State of Telangana, Agricultural Marketing Department

Karan Patil Vs The State of Telangana

T.Shankar Singh, S/o T.Bala Singh, Vs The State of Telangana

Dr.Suri Sreemathi,Seethafalmandi,Secunderabad Vs the Ap Cooperative Tribunal, and 6 Others