Writ petition challenging a transport guideline restricting auto rickshaw permits in conjunction with permanent registration on temporary certificates became infructuous; counsel sought no further orders and the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous without 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.
[3302 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH
WRIT PETITION NO: 18482 OF 2014
Between:
AND
..RESPONDENTS
Petition underArticle 226 of the constitution of lntl I praying that in the circumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed therewith, thr: High court may be pleased to issue a writ,order or directionin the natL-eof Mandamusor otherwise declaringGuideline No.4 in so far as it relates tl-z I Petitioners shallnot be inpossession of an Auto Rickshaw permits is cc rcernedby the1st respondentinhiSLetterLr.No.Tg2lRl/2009dated13'09,:]l2issuedbythelSt respondent is concerned,as arbltrary, illegal and discrimr atory violating Article 14, 19 [1] [g] and21 of the Constitution of lndia and st: aside the sameand fu(her declare theaction of the 2nd respondent in not r suing the permanent registration to thepetitioners in pursuanceof the t mporaryregistratlon certificates issued tothe petitionersas equally arbitrary, illegal,discriminatory viotating Article 14,r gtl ltgland21 of the constitution of rdia apart from hit by principlesofestoppel,andissueconsequentialdire;tions,directingthe respondents toforthwithissue the permanent registratio to the petitionersir pursuance of temporary registrationcertificates.
l.A. NO: 'l OF 2014(WPMP. NO: 23165 oF 2014)
Petition under section151 cPCprayingthat in tl- ( circumstancesstate(l in the affidavit filedin supportof the petition,the Highc ( 'J rt may be pleased lo suspend the GuidelineNo.4 issuedin Proc.Lr.No.792lR1 / 009 dated 13 09.201? issued by the 1strespondent,in so far as it relates to 1r rt the petitloners shail notbeinpossessionofAutoRickshawpermitsisconcerl.d'pendingdisposalof the writpetition.
l.A. NO: 2 OF 2014(WPMP. NO: 23166 OF 2014)
Petition under section151 cPCprayingthat in tr I circumstancesstated in the affidavit filedin supportof the petition,the High(l )urt may be pleased1o direct the 2nd respondentto forthwith issue the pernr nent registrations ard permltS to the petitioners inpursuanceof the temporar,'eglstration certlficates, pending disposal of the writpetition
Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI P.V.KRISHNAIAH
Counsel for the Respondents:GP FOR TRANSPORT
The Court made the following:ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION No.18482 of 2OL4
ORDER:
Learned Counsel appearing lor thepetitioners submits that no further orders arenecessary in this matter and the cause in the WritPetition does not survive and thereby, the WritPetition has become infructuous.
2 Recording the aforementioned submission,the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous.Therc shall be no order as to costs.
pending in this petition, shall stand closed.
//TRUE COPYi/
S . M. JAWAHAR RE ISTANTRE R ECTION OFFICER
To,
a Two CD CoPies BSR GJP NIT
HIGH COURT
DATED: 0711012025
ORDER
WP.No.18482 of2014
( oB lHE S;], 4:x
'c,
o
,o
13 r: )l/x C.:
,* l
. ._.Ia r
' :a
DISMISSINGTHE WRIT PETITION
AS INFRUCTUOUS,
WITHOUT COSTS
/":\ v,,' r{ t 2trJ'e
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Guideline No.4 barring permit holders from possessing auto rickshaw permits was arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21.
Whether respondents were bound to issue permanent registrations pursuant to temporary registration certificates.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Mudavath Motilal
Mohammed Nazeer
Nenavath Balaram
Vadyavath Laxman
Amgoth Srinivas
Sapavath Hari
K. Sarath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
