Petitioner challenged dispossession of land alleging violation of Land Acquisition Act and constitutional rights. Court found cause does not survive adjudication as relief became infructuous, dismissing the petition.
Petition dismissed as infructuous with no costs.
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.
[32e6 I
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)
N/ONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OFSEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENryFOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICEC.V.BHASKARREDDY
WRIT PETITION NO: 3617OF 2016
Between:
Joginip alli Ananda Rao,S/o NaraYana Rao, aged about 75 years, occ Retired Employee, R/o Rudravaram village, Vemulawada Mandal, Karimnagar District.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 ofthe constitution of lndia prayingthat in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filedtherewith,the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriatewrit, order or Direction,more particularlyonein the nature of writof Mandamus, to declarethe action of the respondentsin threatening to dispossessthe petitionerfrom his lawful possessionin respectof the land in Sy.No. 81/AadmeasuringAc. 6.38 guntas situatedat Rudravaram village, VemulawadaMandal,Karimnagar District, withoutfollowing the procedure contemplated under the LandAcquisitionAct and without issuing any notice andpaying thecompensation as per prevailing market value, as being illegal, arbitrary,u nconstitutionaland violativeof Article19,21 and 300-A of the constitution of lndiaand consequentlydirectthe respondent authorities to pay thecompensationaspertheprevailingmarketvalue,andtograntsuchother
relief orreliefsas this Honble court deems fit and proper in the circumstancesof the case
l.A. NO:'l OE2016(WPMP.NO: 4617 0F 2016t
Petition under section151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in the affidavitfiled in support of the petition,the High court may be pleasedto pass orders directingthe respondentauthorities not to dispossess the petitioner herein from theland in Sy.No.81/A admeasuring Ac.6.38gts situatedat RudravaramVillage, Vemulawadattilandal, Karimnagar District, pending disposal of themain writ Petition, and to pass suchother orderor orders as this Hon'bie Court maydeem fit and proper in the circumstancesof the case.
Counsel for thePetitioner:SRI KANDI RAMCHANDRA REDDY
Counsel for theRespondents:GP FORREVENUE
The Court madethe following:ORDER
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.3617 of 2OL6
ORDER:
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication and the relief sought in the writpetition.has become infructuous.
Recording the said submission, the writ petition is
dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if
any, shall stand closed
SD'.V.KAVITHA ASSISTANTREGISTRAR
//TRUECOPY//
SEC OFFICER
To, 1 One CCto SRIKANDI RAMCHANDRA REDDY' AdvocateIOPUCI
J Two CDCoPies BSR * GJP
i I I I
HIGH COURT
DATED: 0210912024
ORDER
WP.No.3617 of 2016
7
r,E S.4ra.:'
(
r,
) <br>o 1 i1 0Et 7l]2[ c,
I
:),,
\i-?',,'.,,' '' (: .:
i_.-: -:.i-:. -.-
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION
AS INFRUCTUOUS,
WITHOUT COSTS
€tt
6rtqw
:il'$ A
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition survives for adjudication.
Joginipalli Ananda Rao
The State of Telangana
C.V. BHASKARREDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
