The petitioner's counsel submitted that the cause of action in the writ petition had ceased to exist. The Court accepted this submission and dismissed the writ petition as infructuous.
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)
FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH
WRIT PETITION NO: 33827 oF 2011
Between:
Y.S.S. Prasad, S/o. Late Sriramulu, aged 64 years, Occ: Rtd. Employee, Rl/o. H.No. 8-2-269119182 and 83, lndira Nagar, HyderabaO - aS.
AND
.....PET|T|ONER
.....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 writ or direction preferably writ of mandamus declaring the Memos dts. 17-03-2010,30-05-2011 and endorsement dt. 23-06-2011 issued by the respondent No. 3 to the extent of directing the petitioner to pay market value as per G.O.Ms.No.166 dt. 16-02-2008 instead of G.O.tvts.No.508 dt. 20-10-1995 even though the application of the petitioner for regularization was already approved long ago i.e. on 21-07-2006 are illegal, arbitrary, contrary to record and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the said order to the extent of said direction and further direct the respondents to collect market value or Rs.400l per sq. yard as fixed in G.O.Ms. No. 508 in respect of the H.No. 8-2-269119182 and 83 situated at lndira Nagar, Hyderabad - 33 total admeasuring 180 sq. yards.
I.A.NO:1 OF 2011(WPMP.NO :42O64OF 2011)
Petition Undersection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filedn support of the petition, the High court maybe pleasedto direct the respondentNo. 1 to reconsiderthe claimof the applicant by disposing of the representationsdl. 01-12-2010 and 14-06-2011 of the petilioner in view of G.O.tr/s. No. 102'1dt. 25-09-2009, pending disposal of writ petitionin the interest ofjustice.
Counsel for thePetitidner: SRI KOWTURU PAVAN KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ASSIGNMENT
The Court made thefollowingORDER
-/
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARAT}I
WRIT PETITTON No.338 27 of 2OlL
ORDER:
Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the cause in the Writ petition does not survive and no further orders are required to be passed in this matter, thereby, the Writ petition has become
infructuous
pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
SD/. T. JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY// I S CTION OFFICER
To
I
HIGH COURT
DATED:1311212024
ORDER
WP.No.33827 of2011
3-T,i' I t
q t
2 B tEB ?[25 !C
a-
)..
CY<br>: 'ra.i i),.]J
-l--jj::
DISMISSING THEW.P
AS INFRUCTUOUSWITHOUT COSTS'
01t,s
t
Y.S.S. Prasad
The Government of A.P.
The Special Chief Secretary and Chief Commissioner Land Administration
The District Collector, Hyderabad
K. Sarath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
