The High Court of Telangana dismissed a writ petition and a miscellaneous petition as infructuous, holding that the cause no longer survived for adjudication without awarding costs.
The writ petition and miscellaneous petition were dismissed as infructuous; no costs awarded.
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.
[3296 ]
I
I I I I I
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO: 34 5 0F 2015
Between:
...PET|T|oNERS
AND
2 The District C6llector, Hyderabad.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ of l\rrandamus or any other appropriate writ. order or orders. Direction or Directions to decrare that the Acquisition initiated in Proceedings vide officiar Gazette dated 5.3.2013 in respect of the property bearing No 5- 5-511, 5-5-S11t1 and 5-5-513, MJ.Market Road, Hyderabad has tapsed by virtue of the provisions of Sec.25 0f rhe Right ro Fair compensation And Transparency ln Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation And Resetfiement Act. 2o13 and to set aside the notice issued by the 3rd respondent in Fire No.c1l 101312013 dated 26 9.2015 as being contrary to the earrier order of this Hon,bre court under
/
7/we No.SA62O]2O13dated 20.3.2014and to restrain rhe respondents from / dispossessing the petitioners from the said premises.
/
/ I
NO:'t OF 1 P.N 442020F 2015
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 say of all further proceedings in pursuance to the notice issued by the 3rd respondent in File No. c11101312013 dated 26.09.201 5, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.
Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI VEDULA SRINIVAS Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 & 2: Gp FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 TO 5: SRt M.A.K. MUKHEED, SC FOR GHMC Counsel for the Respondent No.6: --
The Court made the following: ORDER
/
I
I I
THE HONOURABLE SRI JTISTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION No. 34385 of2015
ORDER:
When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the cause in the writ petition does not survive lor adjudication and hence, the writ petition has become infructuous.
In view of the said submission, the Writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending sha.ll stand
closcd
sd/- T.J REE ASSISTANT
//TRUE COPY//
SEC FICER
To 1. One CC to SRI VEDULA SRINIVAS, Advocete [OP^U.C]- ^- i 5;; cc io 5nrr,,l e x rvruxneeo'Sc ronGHMC[oPUc] - 5. iffi E6;]""GPFbi nevelrUe,Hish court for the State of relansana' at Hyderabad. [OUT]
PSK.. - MPYY
HIGH COURT
DATED:21 10812024
ORDER
WP.No.34385 of 2015
1HE s,-4
(
/Q
r't.L ii
.J
14 OIT ilil
t
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS.
+,rPtd Hra(qYq
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition survives for adjudication.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ivlohammed 44Ohe1 Hulsain
State of Telangana
District Collector, Hyderabad
Special Grade Deputy Collector (LAO) Metro Rail project
The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation
Hyderabad Metro Rail Ltd
C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
