The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by petitioners challenging the dispossessing of their agricultural land as non-prosecuted after no representation appeared on their behalf during hearings.
Null
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.
[3302 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE N{NTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH
WRIT PETITION NO: 33518 OF 2010
Between:
,....PETITIONERS
AND
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition Under Article 226 o'f lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in interfering in peaceful enjoyment of agriculture land in an extent of Ac. 4.2O guntas in respect of 1st petitioner and Ac.2.35 guntas in respect of 2nd petitioner situated in Sy. No. 427 of Kadaparti Village, Nakrekal Mandal, Nalgonda Dist. without verifying the revenue records is totally arbitrary, illegal and u nconstitutiona I and contrary to the rules and consequently direct the respondent not to d ispossess the petitioners from their agriculture land in an extent of Ac. 4.20 guntas of 1st petitioner and Ac. 2.35 guntas of 2nd petitioner situated in Survey No. 427 of Kadaparti Village, Nakrekal Mandal, Nalgonda District.
t.A. o:10F 0 MP. NO:424980F2010
PetitionUnderSection151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the affidavitfiled in supportof the writ petition'the High Court may be pleased to directthe respondent particularly 3rd respondent not to dispossess the petitioners frompeaceful enjoymentof Agriculture Land in an extent of Ac 4'20 guntas of 1st petitionerand Ac'2'35 guntasof 2nd petitioner situated in SurveyNo' 427 of KadapartyVillage, Nakrekal Mandal'NalgondaDistrict' pendingdisposal of the writ Petition.
|.A.NO:1OF 2013(WVMP' NO: 3926 OF 2013)
Between:
"...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS
AND
: Agriculture'FUo'KadaParthi
... "RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS
PetitionUnder Section151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the affidavitfiled in support of the petition'the High Court maybe pleased to vacatethe interim order passed in WP No 33518 of 2010 dated 30 12'2010'
COUNSEIfOT thE PEtitiONET: SRI K.VENUGOPAL REDDY (NOT PRESENT)
Counselfor the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE
The Courtmade the following ORDER
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITI ON No.33s 18 of2O1O
ORDER:
This writ petition is coming for hearing since 201O. On 24.10.2024 when the matter was called, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners, and therefore, the matter.was direcred to be listed on 14. ll.2}24 under the caption "for dismissal,'. On lg. lI.2O24 when the matter was called, learned counsel for the petitioners sought time and therefore, the matter was directed to be listed on 02.12.2024 under the same caption. Today i.e, 09. 12.2024, when the matter is called, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. It seems that the petitioners are not interested to prosecute this case.
SDI L.VIJAYALAXMI TANTREGISTRAR //TRUECOPY// SECTI ONOFFICER
to ,. ,o CCs to GP FoR REVENUE' High Court for the State of Telanganaat , 3I1"6'3?jJ3,',&tuoo"ALREDDY' AdvocatetoPucl 3. TwoCD CoPies SA BSR(r
HIGH COURT
SK,J
DATED:0911212024
1 H € s t4
(
(
o 2a JAIi I
zw5
C
+
a .a
P4rcHE o
ORDER
WP.No.33518 of 2010
DISMISSING THE W.P
FOR NON - PROSECUTION / DEFAULT
WITHOUT COSTS.
od"a
C
w
d'@
Nimmanagooti Saidulu
D. Sankarappa
The State of A.P.
K. Sarath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
