Two writ petitions challenging a revenue order concerning house plots in Chitkul village were dismissed for non-prosecution after petitioners failed to appear despite service of notices following their counsel's death.
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.
I
[3302 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
I,,IONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH
WRIT PETITION NOs: 1089 and 1101 of 2011
WRIT PETITION NO: 1089 OF 2011
Between:
Smt. Amrutha @ Anitha, Wio. Prabhu, age 30 years, Occ: House Hold, Rl/o Plot No.438, Sy.No 329, Chitkul Village, Patancheru lvlandal, Medak District
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of th,e Constitution of lndia praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed thdrewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare that the Proc. No. C11216512009 dt. -10-2010 issued by the 2nd respondent is arbitrary. illegal and unsustainable and thereon the impugned order be set aside in the interests ofjustice and equity.
l.A. NO:'l OF 2011(WPMP. NO: 1326OF 20111
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may bepleased to suspend the impugned Ptoc.C1l216512009 dt. -10-2010 thereby not to dispossess / demolish the petitioner house constructed in Plot No.438 in Sy.No. 329, Chitkul Village, Patancheru [,4andal, [r/edak District, pending disposal of the main writ petition rn the interest of JUStice and equity.
Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. AMRUTHA
Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 3: Gp FOR REVENUT:
Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI K.PRADEEP REDDy. SC FOR GRAM PANCHAYAT
WRIT PETITION NO:1 1010F 2011
Between:
Smt. V.Varsh a, W/o Vishnu Vardhan Reddy, aged 26./enrs, Occ: House wife Districtr/o. Plot No. 22, Sy No. 329 Chitkut Vit;s;: %i;ri,lru i,lr"njrr rv"arr
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rncJis praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the Fligh Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particurarrl..ne in the nature of writ of lvandamus to decrare that the proc. No c1r2165t2oott dt. -10-2010 issued by the 2nd respondent is arbitrary, iregal and unsusiainabre and thereon the impugned order be set aside in the interests of justice anC equity.
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP NO:'1340 oF 2011)
Petition under Section 15-1 CpC praying that in the crrlumstances stated in the affidavit fired rn support of the petition. the High courr may be preased to suspend the impugned proc. c11216512009 dt -10-2010 thereby not to dispossess / demorish the petitioner house constructed in p ot No 22 in Sy.No. 329 Chitkur Virage, patancheru Mandar, IVredak District penJing disposar of the main Writ petition in the interests of justice and equity.
Counsel for the petitioner: Ms. VARSHA Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 3: Gp FOR REVENUE uounset tor the Respondent No.4: SRI K.PRADEEP REDDy. rhe cou rt made rh e ro r r o* i n s,sfJfl [3Ti3 [Slff ^*'
I
\
THE HONOURABLESRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
uIRIT PETITION Nos.1089 and 11O1 of2O11
ORDER:
When the matterswere taken up for hearingon 08.11.2024, it wasinformed to this Court that the learned counsel appearing forthe petitioner inboth the writ petitions expired. In viewof the sarrte, the Registry was directed to issue noticcsto the r'vrit petitioners' As per the postal track rcport submittedby the Registry, the notices were served on them on29.71.2024. In spite of service of notices, none appeared lorthe petitioners inboth the rnatters.
{
7
. \ -'-
2
Pending miscellarreous applications, if any in this petition, shall stand closed
SD/. M. OSMANALI BAIG ASiSTSTANT BEGISTRAR /o//TRUE COPY// SECTb( OFFICER
To,
BSR w
TKS
ti
,
HIGH COURT
DATE D: 1 810812025
COMMON ORDER WP.Nos.1089 and1101 ot 2011
o
t)
e
t ? 1 t{0l/ 2[6
o
lt *
:snrrcHg o
DISMISSING BOTHTHE WRIT PETITIONS FOR NON.PROSECUTION,
WITHOUT COSTS
g ."*r'l
V-
Ktr
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Amrutha @ Anitha
The District Collector, Medak
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy
The Tahsildar, Patancheru Mandal
The Executive Officer and Panchayat Secretary, Chitkul Village
Smt. V. Varsha
K. Sarath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
