Writ petition challenging attempted dispossession of petitioners' agricultural land by temple and revenue authorities was dismissed as infructuous, counsel stating the cause no longer survived for adjudication.
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.
[3300 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION NO: 12787 OF 20'18
Between:
...PETITIONERS
AND
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution oflndiaprayingthat in the circumstances stated in the affidavitfiledtherewith, the High Court maybe pleased to issue a writ, order or direction moreparticularly onein the natureof writ of mandamus declaring the actionof the respondents4,5 and 6 in tryingto dispossess thepetitioners from theirland insurvey no.434, 347 and 438 of Aliyabad village, Shamirpet Mandal,tvledchalDistrict in an extent of Ac.3.37 gts without any authority, without following theprocedure as contemplated under the
-7
A.P. Endowments F r:t as ilegar, arbitrary, unconstitutionar a rd in vioration of 411.21 of the constitrtion of rndia an consequenfly direct the respondents not to interfere with the pee c:eful possession of the petitioners.
lA NO: 1 OF 201 8
Petition under {iection 15'r cpc praying that in thr: circumr;tances stated in the affidavit fired irr support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the responde rrts not to dispossess the petitioners frr m their rand admeasuring Ac.3.3r gts., in survey no.434, 347 and 4:lg of Al yabad village, shamirpet l\rlandar, furt:dchar District, Terangana, pending disposa of the above writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S.NAGESWARAREDDy
Counsel for the Respc,ndent No.1 to 3; Gp FOR ENDOWMENTS
Counsel for the Respondent No.4 & 5: Gp FOR REVENUE
Counsel for the Respcndent No.6: SRI J.R.MANOHAR RA(f, SC FOR ENDOWMENT.S
The Court made the fr:llowing: ORDER
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAI(A
WRIT PETITION No.12787 of 2o1-8
ORDER:
When the matter has been taken up for hearing, learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the cause in the present writ petition does not survive for adjudication and it has become infructuous.
pending, if any, in this Writ petition, shall stand closed.
SD/- K. AMMAJI SI TANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To,
BSR GJP (fr
i i I
HIGH COURT
DATED:05101'-12025
t
ORDER
WP.No.1278-,tof 2018
t2' I E_t_Ah
J,/.4
,,. (2 I
'?
1 <br>s
c
s* I
a l,t!r
4t' ,:,'
- ', , -.,)
DISMISSING'THE WRIT PETITION
AS INFRUC'TUOUS,
WITHOUT COSTS
trA-
(q<br>I t.r L'
3a I
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Thirumala Venkatesh
Thirumala Raghunath
The State of Telangana, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Endowments Department
The Commissioner of Endowments, Boggulakunta, Hyderabad
The Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Medchal District
The Mandal Revenue Officer, Shamirpet Mandal, Medchal District
Nagesh Bheemapaka
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
