Dismissed

Dalit Sankshema Sangam (Regd.) v. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Telangana HC16 Oct 2024WP/19853/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge oral order dismisses a writ petition filed by Dalit Sankshema Sangam against the GHMC and HMWSSB seeking provision of civic amenities on government land. The court held the petition infructuous and allowed it to be closed as per counsel's submission.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous with no order as to costs.

Dalit Sankshema Sangam (Regd.) Vs The… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁸ ]

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY^{OF OCTOBER} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

WRIT PETITIO N NO: 19853 OF 2013

¶7

Between:

¶8

Dalit Sankshema Sangam (Regd.), Chaitanyapuri,^{KothapetVillage, Uppal Mandal,} R.R.Diskict. Rep. by iti General Secretary,^{S. Shankar.}

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation,^{Rep by its Deputy} Commissioner, L.B.Nagar Circle, Hyderabad^{at Saroornagar.}

¶12

The General Manager, Hyderabad Metro^{Water Works, Sahebnagar,} Hyderabad.

¶13

.....RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition Under Article 226 oI 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 onein} the nature of writ of Mandamus^{declaringthe inaction of the respondents in} providing civic amenities to the members of the^{petitioner Association in the} Government land bearing Sy.No.'181l1 of^{KothapetaVillage, Uppal Mandal,} R.R.District as being discriminatory^{and dereliction of duties, atrocious, and} opposed to the Directive^{principlesof State Policy and violatlve of the guidelines} issued by the Government rn this regard.^{Thus their action is violativeof Articles} '14, 15, 16, 17, 19 and 46 of the Constitution of lndia apart from being violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of^{lndia and consequently direct the respondents to} expedite steps for ihe^provision of all^{amenitiesin the locality.}

¶15

LA.NO:1 OF 2013 (WPMP.NO:24347 OF 2013

¶16

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 direct the respondents to Iay the pipelines in the locality of the petitioner Association in the government land in Sy.No. 1'81t1 of Kohtapeta Village, Uppal Mandal, R.R. Distri,:t without further delay, pending disposal of the main writ petition.

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI S.TULASI DAS

¶18

Counsel forthe RespondentNo.l : SRI M.DURGA PRASAD (SC FOR GHMC) Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRI T. SUDHAKAR REDDY( SC FOR HMWSSB)

¶19

The Court made the following ORDER

¶20

¶21

HON'BLE SRI.TUSTICE K.^LAKSHMAN

¶22

WRIT PETITION No.19853^{OF 2013}

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Sri S. Tulasi Das, learned^{counsel for the petitioner} on instructions would'^{submit that the carrse in tlie} present writ petition does not^{survlvefor adjudication} and it has become infructuous.

¶25

In the light of the said^{submission,this writ petition} is dismissed as infructuous.^{There shall be no order as to}

¶26

costs

¶27

As a sequel, miscellaneous^{petitions, if any, pending}

¶28

in the Writ Petition shall^staldclosed.

¶29

¶30

SD/. N. SRIHARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶31

//TRUE COPY//

¶32

[/", SECTI O,t OFFICER

¶33

¶34

One CC to SRI S.TULASI DAS, Advocate [OPUC]

¶35

One CC to SRI T.SUDHAKAR REDDY^{(SC FOR H[/WSSB)Advocate} loPUCl

¶36

bne CC to SRI M.DURGA PRASAD^{(SC FORGHMC) Advocate} [OPUC]

¶37

Two CD Copies

¶38

¶39

LS v

¶40

HIGH COURT

¶41

DATED:1611012024

¶42

\ri: SiA;- t'
I
q t
/f,
d 280E[ roA zo
*
f)Esp/,tcs€o *

ORDER

WP.No.19853 of 2013

DISMISSING THE W.P

AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS.

¶47

d
/ B
I 7n/tc /<a

Dalit Sankshema Sangam (Regd.) v. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dalit Sankshema Sangam (Regd.) v. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijay Kumar Gupta, Hyd. Vs Commr., Ghmc, Hyd. and Ano.

R. Rohini Durga, Vs Osmania University, Hyderabad

Mrs. M.Sulochana, Vs The Commissioner

Sajid Hussain Vs The Commissioner

G.Padmavathi Vs The State of Telangana

Ms. Anantapur Shriya Vs The State of Telangana