Sri Ushi Reddy Anugu Vs The Hon'ble Junior Civil Judge

Sri Ushi Reddy.Anugu,. S/o^" Sri Lgt_e, paqra Reddy Anugu, Aged about 50 years, Occupation. Advocate, PERMNENT Address. ?o. "fl. N".^-7-4, B,ayyanag^udem Villager I\4ahalilgapu ram, Gram panchayat, Shankirpally [/^a!d?!_EalSa Reddy District, Tetangana State, pRESENTLy R/o. H.' No. !9-^2:1!5!6417,^{(New 648) Anand Nagar cotony, Matakpet,} Hyderabad- 500036, Telangana State

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

1 The Honourable Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Chevella, State of Telangana.

¶15

2 The Honourable sri P.B. Kiran Kumar, Junior civir Judqe-cum-Metroooritan. Magistrate at Chevella, Ranga Reddy District, State of Tdlangana.

¶16

3 The Honourable Smt. P. Devi lVanasa, Junior Civil Judge-Cum-Metropolitan, [\ilagiskate at ctrevella, R. R.- District (previousry), il Addl. Junior civiiiuogel C^um-ll .Addl. Metropotitan Magistraie, Matkajgiri Court t,ledchii DGir-,ci (Hresent) State ot I elangana.

¶17

4 Anugu Pus!.lcalalfa, Wlo S_ubhakar Reddy, Aged about 33 years, Occ. Housewife, Rt/o. H. No. 7-4, Bayannagudem, Snaikarpally, Dhob'ipei, ha;g; Reddy, Telangana 501 203.

¶18

Smt, Chamala.Anusuja @_Anda-lu, W/o. Chamala Ram Reddy, Aged about 60 fea5, _O.cc.^{Ho_us-ewife,Rt/o.Kotmarpally Village, Marpaily-Maidal,} Ranga Reddy District, T. S.

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be

¶21

pleased to issue a Writ or Ctrder or Direction more particularly a Writ of Certiorari, declaring the inaction of the first respondent the Honorable Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at Chevella, State of Telangana, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing the lA 124212024 dated 18.09.2024, filed by third party stranger non alienating person U/o. 1 Rule'10 CPC. in the Suit for Specific Performance in O.S. No. 688/2022, in compliance of the Honorable Supreme Court directions, NON ALIENATING MEIVIBERS OF JOINT FAIVILY HAVE NO LOCUS STANDI TO CONDUCT THE SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE IN COIi4PLIANCE OF THE LAW D=CLARED BY THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IS PRECEDENT.AND BINDING AS PER THE ARTICLE 141 OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION, OVER THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUIV IVETROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT CHEVELLA RANGA REDDY DISTRICT, WILFULLY DISOBEYING 2008 r\lR (Supreme Coun) 2134, 1998 (1)ALT 496, 2023 ALf 1, AIR 2000 Supreme Court 2740, 1990 Supreme Court 854,2003(4) ALT 9, AIR 2006 Bombay 134, 1995(3) SCC 147, 1996(10) SCC 53 200s(51 RCR (Civir) 697, 1995 (1)hRR,360,2004.2010 (10) SCC s12, 1993 (2) SCC 740, oblique motive, for some 3xtraneous consideration while functioning as junior civil judge Chevella - 2022 (4) ALT 15 (TS) in view of the directions issued by the Honorable High Court of Telangana amounts to the contempt of court. lt is a jugglery, manipulation, manoeuvring or misrepresentatron, which has no place in equitable and prerogative juriscliction. lf the applicant does not disclose all the material facts fairly and truly but s;tates them in a distorted manner and misleads the court, the court has inherent power in order to protect itself and to prevent an abuse of its process to discharge the rule nisi and refuse to proceed further with the examination of the case on m,:rits. lf the court does not reject the petition on that ground the court would be failing in its duty. ln fact, such an applicant requires to be dealt with for CONTEIVPT OF COURT FOR ABUSING THE PROCESS OF THE COURT (F'ara 10) - kindly be initiated the contempt proceedings against the Honorakrle Sri P.B. Kiran Kumar, Junior Civil JudgeCum-Metropolitan, Magistrate at Ohevella, Ranga Reddy District - Smt. P. Devi Manasa, Junior Civil J udge-Cum-Metropolitan, Magistrate at Chevella, R. R. District (Previously), ll Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum-ll Addl. Metropolitan lvlagistrate tt/alkalgiri Court Medchal District, (Present) -Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Section^{'l '1} and^'1 2 - Hon:rable Junior Civil Judge committed serious

¶22

misconduct and dereliction of duty - Disciplinary^authority of^{lt4etropolitan,} " Magistrate is Administrator -Constitution of lndia, Article 215 - in Para 13 - wilfully violating the^principles of Natural Justice,^provisions of Specific Relief Act,^'1963, The^petitioners Suits in O.S. Nos. 687 3, 686, 688 are unnecessarily kept pending by the Honorable Junior Civil Judge R.R. District at Chevella intending to create third party interest by mrsusing the power it amounts to the abuse of process of law, wilfully disobeying the Honorable Division Bench directions dated^'l 1.07.2024 in W.P. Nos. 17086, 17091, 17093 of 2024. THE TRIAL COURT MAY IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE PENDING APPLICATIONS UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 1O CPC.EXPEDITIOUSLY, PREFERABLE WITHIN TWENTY.ONE DAYS FROM THE DATE OF PRODUCTION OF COPY OF THIS ORDER, in compliance oI (2020) 2 SCC 173, The Honorable Supreme Court of lndia held that. To ensure purity and administration of^justice, the least that is required is to prevent any ineligible candidate to secure appointment on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level).

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶24

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 Stay all further^proceedings of the orders dated 18.09.2024^passed by the Honorable Junior Civil Judge-Cum-tVetropolitan, [Vagistrate at Chevella, Ranga Reddy District in l.A. No. 1242 of 2024,'filed by Anugu Pushpalatha. u/o. 1 rule 10 CPC, third party, stranger, NON ALIENATING IVEIVBERS OF JOINT FAtUILY HAVE NO LOCUS STANDI TO CONDUCT THE SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORIV1ANCE IN COMPLIANCE OF THE LAW DECLARED BY THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IS PRECEDENT AND BINDING AS PER THE ARTICLE 141 OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION, OVER THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT CHEVELLA RANGA REDDY DISTRICT, WILFULLY DISOBEYING 2008 AIR^(Supreme Court) 2134, 1998 (1) ALT 496, 2023 ALT 1, AIR 2000 Supreme Courl 2740, 1990 Supreme Court 854,2003(4) ALT 9, AIR 2006 Bombay 134, 1S95(3) SCC 147, 1996(10) SCC 53. 2005(51 RCR (Civil) 697, 1995 (1)RRR 660,2004. 2010 (10) SCC 512, 1993 (2) SCC 740, she is non alienating person, as a proposed

¶25

defendant No. 3, in the Suit for Sipecific Performance O S. No. 68812022 during ", pendency of the present Writ Peti:ion.

¶26

lA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶27

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 issue the directions to the Registrar General Honorable High court of Telangana at Hyderabad, withdrawal of^judicial work from Honorable Sri P.B. Kiran Kumar. Junior Civil Judge-Cum-Metropolitan, Magrstrate at Chevella, Ranga Reddy District - Smt. P- Devi [Vlanasa, Juniqr Civil Judge-Cum-lrletropolitan, Magistrate at Chevella, R. R. District (Previcusly), ll Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum-ll Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate Malkajgriri Court Medchal District, (Present) with immediate effect, until disposal of the present Writ Petition.

¶28

lA NO: 4 OF 2024

¶29

Petition under Sectiori 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Section to furnish the copy of the Orders dated 1 1.11.2024 and 19.11.2024, by way of granting the liberty for preferring the Special Leave Petition under Article 136, 142.1211, of the lndian Constitution before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of lndia, by the Petitioner A. Ushi Reddy, Supreme Court Advocate.

¶30

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.l.lSHl REDDY [PARTY-IN-PERSON]

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI V.VENKATA MAYUR

¶32

WRIT PETITION NO: 17086 OF 2024

¶33

Between:

¶34

Sri Ushi Reddy Anugu, S/o. Sri Late. Parma Reddy Anugu, Aged about 50 years, Occupation. Advocak), PERMANENT Address. Fl/o. H. No. 7-4, Bayyanagudem Village, Mahalingapuram, Gram Panchayat, Shankarpally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State, PRESENTLY R:/o. H. No. 16-2-14516417, (New 648) Anand Nagar colony, Malakpet, Hyderabad - 500036, Telangana State

¶35

...PETITIONER

¶36

AND

¶37

The Honourable Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Chevella, State of Telangana.

¶38

Smt. Murthi Parvathamma @ Chandra Mani, W/o. Murthi Ninga Reddy, aged about 65 years, Occupation. Housewife, Permanent R/o. H. No. 1-74, Huggelli Vrllage, Zaheerabad Mandal, Sanga Reddy District, Presently Fl/o. H. No. 1-6'106/1 , Plot No. '159, Sai Ram colony, Behind Sai Baba Temple, Zaheerabad - 502318, Sanga Reddy District, State of Telangana.

¶39

...RESPONDENTS

¶40

Petition unde!'Adicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or Order. or Direction more particularly a Writ of Certiorari, declaring the inaction of the first respondent the Honourable Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at Chevella, State of Telangana, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated O9lO5l2O24 in l-A. No. 585 oI 2024 in O.S. No. 68112022, passed by the Honourable Junior Civil Judge-Cum-Metropolitan Magistrate. At Chevella. Ranga Reddy District, Nonfollowing of the Rule of Law, ignoring the directions, guidelines issued by the Honourable Supreme Court of lndia, by exceeding the jurisdiction, dismissing the said l.A. the Petition filed Under Order XX Rule 1 R/W Section 151 of C.P.C. Chapter Xll Rule 142 Civil Rules of Practice and Circular Orders by the Petitioner/ Plaintiff praying this Court to pass Judgement and Decree in the said Suit, as per Docket Order proceedings of the JCJ, first time 1810712023 lo 1710812023, Second lime 2310812023 to 2210912023, mandatory to pass the .iudgement^{within30 days, but failedto do so, by the HonourablePresiding} Officer Junior Civil Judge, at Chevella, Ranga Reddy Dist, failed to comply the Rule of Law, Order XX Rule 1 CPC and Chapter Xll Rule 142 Civil Rules of Practice and Circular Orders, the Honourable High court has issued circular in ROC. No.4001/OP CELL -El2004 dated 30/08/2004, the Honourable High Court issued another circular vide ROC- No. 1708/201 1-Vigilance Cell, The impugned orders passed by arriving the wrong finding in para 7 and B of the Orders, denying to pass the^judgement by the Presiding Officer of the Honourable Junior Civil Judge Chevella, Ranga Reddy District, intending to create, stranger, the third party interest not necessary parties to the suit, their presence is not required for affective, complete adjudlcation of the suit agreement, which is subject matter of the suit for specific performance filed by the present Petitioner

¶41

is the^{praintiff,even if the properlywhich is the subiect matter of the agreement} to sell^{is the ancestral property' non alienatingmemberof joint family haveno} locus^{standi to conductthe suit for specific performance'in compliance of the} Law^{declared by the HonourableSupreme Court of lndia is precedent and} bindingaspertheArticle-l4lofthelndianConstitution'overtheHonourable Junior^{Civil Judge-Cum- Metropolitan Magistrate' at Chevella Ranga Reddy} District,^{wilfully disobeying 2008 AIR (Supreme Court) 2134' 19S8 (1)ALT496'} 2023^{ALT1. ArR 2000 supreme courl 2740..1990 Supremecourt 854.2003(4)} ALT^{g AlR 2006 Bombav 134199s(3)SCC 147 1996(10) SCC 53' 2005(51} RCR(Civil)^{691. 1995(1) RRR 661 mo4 2o1O (10) SCC 512 1993 (2) SCC 740'} Hence,^{seekingthe disciplinary croceedings' against the HonourableJudge Sri} P.B.^{Kiran Kumar, in viewof the guidelines (2023(1) Ker L J 270)Mohammed} Nazer^{tvl.P. v. Union Territory ol Lakshadweep(Kerala) Heldthat lndianpenal} Code,^{1860 Sections143' 14' 188' 186' and 353 read with Section 149 -} Criminal^{ProcedureCode) 197:i Section '195 and 340 - Allegationof forgery} against^{Chief JudicialIVlagistratr: - Sentence - Allegation against ChiefJudicial} Magistrate^{that he has not recorded evidenceof investigatingofficer - Chief} Judicial^{MagistrateIorged evider-rceof investigatingofficer and he is liable to be} proceed as^{per Section 340 of the Cr-P-C '1973 - Chief JudicialMagislrate} committed^{serious misconduct and dereliction of duty - Disciplinaryauthority of} chief^{Judiciar N/agistrateis Adrninistrator, UnionTerritoryof Lakshadweepand} should^{be placed under suspension pending enquiry)}

¶42

IAN^{O:1 OF 2024}

¶43

Petition^{under Section 1';1 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the^{affidavit fired in supportc,f the petition,the High court maybe pleasedto} pass appropriate^{orders,as Circle No 33B is not binding on the practicing} Advocates^{of HighCourt of Telangana at Hyderabad as well as Supreme Court} of lndia^{by way of exempting tht: practicing Advocates as Party-in-Person'}

¶44

IA NO:^{2 oF 2024}

¶45

Petition^{under Section 1lt1 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit^{firedin support rrf the petition, the Highcourt maybe pleasedto} grant leave^{to me f ile the dock(d order dated Og'O8-2024' passed by the Hon'ble}

¶46

Ei

¶47

Junror Civil^judge, Ranga Reddy District at Chevella, in lA. No. 1640/2024 in OS No.68712022.

¶48

lA NO: 3 OF 2024

¶49

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 For the reasons stated in the Letter dated 10.09.2024 in Lr.Dis.No. 896124, forwarded by the Junior Civil Judge, Chevella,'Ranga Reddy District^praying this Hon'ble High Court to grant extension of time for further period of two⁽²⁾ weeks to dispose the applications under Order 1 Rule^'10 CPC in lA.No.543 of 2024 in OS.No.686 of 2022. lA.No.544 of 2024 in OS.No.687 of 2022 and lA.No.'1242 of 2024 in OS.No.688 ot 2022.

¶50

lA NO: 5 OF 2024

¶51

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 direct the Section to furnish the copy of the Orders dated 1 1.11.2024 and 19.11.2024, by way of granting the liberty for^preferring the Special Leave Petition under Article 136, 142, 1 29, of the lndian Constitution before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of lndia, by the Petitioner A. Ushi Reddy, Supreme Court Advocate.

¶52

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.USHI REDDY [PARTY-IN-PERSON]

¶53

Counsel for the Respondents: ---

¶54

WRIT PETITION NO: 17091OF 2024

¶55

Between:

¶56

Sri Ushi Reddy Anugu, S/o. Sri Late. Parma Reddy Anugu, Aged about⁵⁰ years, Occupation. Advocate, PERTVIANENT Address. Rl/o. H. No. 7-4, Bayyanagudem Village, Ivlahalingapuram, Gram Panchayat, Shankarpally lvlandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State, PRESENTLY Rl/o. H. No. 16-2-14516417, (New 648) Anand Nagar colony, Malakpet, Hyderabad^- 500036, Telangana State

¶57

...PETITIONER

¶58

AND

¶59

1 The Honble Junior Crvil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Chevella, State of Telangana.

¶60

2 Smt. Chiranri Sabitha, W/o^{Chiranji Madhav ReddyAged ab^out 55 years} Occuoation' Housewife,^{RJ:. Pulkal Village and Manoal' SangaKeooy} Distri;t, Telangana^State.

¶61

...RESPONDENTS

¶62

Petition under^{Article226 ol lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the} circumstances^{stated in the affi(lavitfiledtherewith, the High court may be} pleased to issue a^{writ or order or Directionmoreparticularly a writ of} certiorari,^{declaringthe inactionof the first respondent the Honourable Junior} CivilJudge,RangaReddyDistrict,atChevella,stateofTelangana'prayingto issue a writ^{of certiorariquashin,; the impugnedorder dated 09.05 2024 in IA.} No.5B2of2024ino.S.No.6Set2o22,passedbytheHonourableJuniorCivil Judge-cum-tr/etropolitan^{Magistrzrte. At chevella. Ranga Reddy District,Non-} following^{of the Rule of Law, ignoringthe directions, guidelines issued by the} Honourable^{Supreme courtof ln.da, by exceeding the jurisdiction, dismissingthe} said l.A the Petition filed^{Under Order XX Rule '1 Rl/W Section 151 of C P C'} Xll Rule 142 Civil^{Rules of Practice and CircularOrders by the} Chapte^r petitioner/ Plaintiff praying this court to^pass Judgement^{andDecree in thesaid} Suit, as^{per Docket order proceedingsof the JCJ, first time18.07.2023to} 17.o8.2023,^{Second time 23.08.2023to 22.o9.2023, mandatoryto paSS the} judgement within 30 days, but^{failed to do so, by the HonourablePresiding} officer Junior^{civil Judge, at chevella,Ranga ReddyDist, failed to complythe} Rule of^{Law,order XX Rule 1 OPC and Chapter Xll Rule 142 Civil Rules of} practice and circular orders, the Honourable High^{courthas issued circularin} ROC. No.4OO1/oP^{cELL -E/2004dated 30.08.2004,the Honourable High court} issued another^{circular vide Roc. No. 1708/2011- Vigilancecell, The impugned} orderspassedbyarrivingthewrongfindinginparaTand8oftheorders' denying to^{pass the judgement by the Presidingofficerof the Honourable Junior} civil Judge^{chevella, RangaReddy District, intending to create, stranger,the} third^{party interestnot necessa.yparties to the suit, their presence is not} requiredforaffective,completeadjudicationofthesuitagreement,whlchis subject matter^{of the suit for specific performancefiled by the present Petitioner} is the Plaintiff, even^{if the propertywhich is the subject matterof the agreement} tosellistheancestralproperty,llonalienatingmemberofjointfamilyhaveno locus standi to conduct^{the suit lor specific performance, in compliance of the}

¶63

t

¶64

"&_

¶65

Law declared by the Honourable Supreme Court of lndia is^precedent and ', binding as per the Article^.141 of the lndian Constitution, over the Honourable Junior Civil Judge-Cum-Metropolitan Magistrate, at Chevella^{Ranga Reddy} District, wilfully disobeying 2008 AIR^(Supreme Court) 2134, 1998⁽¹⁾ ALT^496, 2023 ALT 1. AIR 2000 Supreme Couft 2740. 1990 Supreme Court 854.^2003(4) ALT'9. AIR 2006 Bombay 134. 199s(3) SCC 147. 1996(10) SCC 53. 2005(5) RCR(Civil) 691 1995(1) RRR 660 2004. 2010⁽¹⁰⁾ SCC 512. 1993⁽²⁾ SCC 740. Hence, seeking the disciplinary^proceedings, against the Honourable Judge Sri P.B. Kiran Kumar, in view of the^{guidelines(2023(1)} Ker L.J.270) Mohammed Nazer M.P. v. Union Territory of Laftshadweep^(Kerala) Held that. lndian^penal Code, 1860 Sections 143, 147,188, 186, and 353 read with Section^{'149 -Criminal} Procedure Code, 1973 Section^'195 and 340^-Allegation of forgery against Chief Judicial l\ilagistrate - Sentence - Allegation against Chief Judicial Magistrate^that he has not recorded evidence^qf. investigating officer - Chief Judicial Magistrate forged evrdence of investigating officer and he is liable to be^proceed as^per Section 340 of the Cr.P.C. 1973^- Chief Judicial tvlagistrate committed serious misconduct and dereliction of duty - Disciplinary authority of Chief Judicial Magistrate is Administrator, Union Territory of Lakshadweep and should be placed under suspension pending enquiry).

¶66

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶67

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 issue the appropriate directions to the Registrar Vigilance^High court^of Telangana at Hyderabad T. S. to initiate the disciplinary^proceedings against the Hon'ble Junior Civil Judge Sri P.B. Kiran Kumar, Junior Civil Judge-CumMetropolitan Magistrate, passed orders in l.A. No. 582 of 2024 in O.S. No. 686 of 2022 daled 09.05.2024, the Hon'ble Junior Civil Judge Smt.^P. Devi^Manasa, Junior Civil Judge-Cum-Metropolitan [Magistrate, Chevella Ranga^{ReddyDistrict,} passed orders in l.A. No. 2006 of 2022 in O.S. No. 686 of 2022 daled 23.01 .2023.

¶68

t

¶69

IA NO:2^{oF 2024}

¶70

petition under section^{151 cpcpraying that in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition'the High Court maybe pleasedto} eave to^{me file the docket order dated09-08-2024' passed by the Hon'ble} grant I Junior Civil iudge,^{Ranga Reddy District at Chevella' in lA No '164'1/2024in OS} No.68712022

¶71

IA NO: 30^{F 2024}

¶72

petition under section^{i 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated} in the^{affidavit fired in support of the petition,the High court may be pleasedFor} the reasons^{stated in the Letter dated 10 09 2024 in Lr'Dis No' 896124'} forwarded^{by the JuniorCivil Judge' Chevella' Ranga Reddy District prayingthis} Hon'ble^{High Courtto grant exten:;ion of time for further periodof two (2) weeks} to dispose^{the applications und6? Order 1 Rule 10 CPC in lA No 543 of 2024in} OS.No.686^{of 2022 lA No 544 of 2024in OS No'687of 2022 and lA No 1242of} 2024^{in OS.No.688 oI 2022'}

¶73

IA NO :5^{oF 2024}

¶74

petition under Section^{151 cpcpraying that in the circumstances stated} in the affidavit^{firedin supportof the petition,the Highcourt may be pleasedto} direct the^{Section to furnish th'3 copy of the Orders dated1 1'11 2024 and} 1g.11.2024,^{by way of permittingthe liberty for preferringthe Special Leave} Petition^{under Article 136'142' 1i29' of the lndian Constitution before the Hon'ble} Supreme^{Court of lndia' by the Petitioner AUshi Reddy' SupremeCourt} Advocate.

¶75

Counsel^{for the Petitioner:SRIA'USHI REDDY [PARW-IN-PERSON]}

¶76

Counsel^{for the ResPondents:'-'}

¶77

WRIT PETITI^{ON NO:1709 3oF 2024}

¶78

Between:

¶79

Sri Ushi Reddv^{Anugu' S/: Sri Late Parma Reddy AnuguAoed about50} years, Bayyan p,#$,L4[:rth;qEffiffi $*#'if isfli+r;'#-atn'i1 Mandal ,^{-Ranga ReddY District' tr}

¶80

I

¶81

16- 2- 145t64t7,^{(New 648) Anand Nagar colony' Malakpet' Hyderabad-} 500036,^{Telangana State'}

¶82

..PETITIONER

¶83

AND

¶84

1 TheHonourableJuniorcivilJudge,RangaReddyDistrictatchevella'state of Telangana'

¶85

2 Smt. Chamala^Anusuja vears. Occ^Housewtle @-A^'fl Y,#8","X"i]l,X8Jifl,[?t'i'^An"%Xf 'R:'"3: heddy^{District, T. S'}

¶86

...RESPONDENTS

¶87

Petition^{under Article 226 of l.he Constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances^{stated in the affidavit filed therewith'the High Court maybe} pleased to^{issue a Writ or Order or Direction more particularly a Writ of} Certiorari,^{declaring the inactionof the first respondent the Honourable Junior} Civil Judge'^{Ranga Reddy Dist'rjct'at Chevella' State of Telangana'prayingto} issue a^{writ of certiorari quashingthe impugned order dated 09/05/2024in lA'} No. 5BB ot^{2024in o. S. Nd.6S8/2022, passedby the HonbreJunior civir Judge-} Cum- Metropolitan^{MagistrateAt Chevella' Ranga ReddyDistrict'Non- following} of the^{Rule of Law, ignoringthe directions' guidelines issued by the Honourable} Supreme^{Court of lndia, by exceeding the iurisdiction' dismissing the said lA'} the Petition^{filed UnderOrder XX Rule1 R/W Section151 of C P C Chapter Xll} Rule 142^{Civil Rules of Practice and Circular Orders by the Petitioner/ Plaintiff} praying this^{Court to pass Judgement and Decree in the saidSuit' as per Docket} Order^{proceedings of the JCJ'first time1810712023 to 17 08 2023 ' Second time} 23tOBt2O23^{to 2210912023'mandatoryto passthe judgement within 30 days'but} failed to^{do so, by the Honourable PresidingOfficerJunior Civil Judge' at} Chevella,^{Ranga ReddyDist' failed to comply the Rule of Law' OrderXX Rule1} CPC and^{ChapterXll Rule 142 Civtl Rules of Practiceand Circular Orders' the} Honourable^{High court has issued circular in ROC' No'4001/OP CELL - E/2004} dated^{30/0g/2004,the Honourabre High court issued another circurar vide Roc'} No. 1708/201^{1- Vigirance cet, The impugned orders passed by arrivingthe} wrong^{finding in para 7 and 8 of the Orders'denyingto passthe iudgement by} the Presiding^{Officerof the HonourableJunior Civil Judge Chevella'Ranga} Reddy^{District'intending to create' stranger' the third party interestnot} necessary^{partiesto the suit' their presence is not requiredfor affective'}

¶88

comprete adjudication of the suil agreement, which is subject matter of the suit for specific performance filed by ihe present petitioner is the plaintiff, even if the property which is the subject m,ltter of the agreement to se, is the ancestrar property, non arienating member of joint famiry have no rocus srandi to conduct the suit for specific performanc(-', in compriance of the Law decrared by the Honourabre supreme court of rnriia is precedent and binding as per the A,*icre 141 0f the rndian constitution, over the Honbre Junior civir Judge- cumMetroporitan Magistrate, at cheverd Ranga Reddy District, wirfury disobeying 2008 AIR (Supreme Courl) 2134,1993 (1) ALT 496, 2023 ALr i AtR 2000 supreme courl 2740'1990 Suprenre court g54 2oo3(4)ALT 9 ArR 2006 Bombay 134 1995(3) SCC 147 1996(10) S;CC 53 2005(s) RCR(Crvit) 69j 1995(1) RRR 660 2004 2010 (10) scc 512 tg6:12.r SCC 740 Hence, seekrng the disciprinary proceedings, against the Honouratrre Judge sri p. B. Kiran Kumar, in view of the guiderines (2023(1) Ker L. J. 270) Ivrohammed Nazer M. p. v. Union Territory of Lakshadweep (Kerala) Held that lndian penat Code, 1860 Sections 143, 141, 188, 186, and 353 read with Ser;tion .149 _ Criminal procedure Code, 1973 Section^'l 95 and 340 - Allegation ,tf forgery against Chief Judrcial Magistrate _ Sentence - Alegation against chiel Judiciar Magistrate that he has not recorded evidence of investigating officer - chief Judiciar Magistrate forged evidence of investigating officer and he is riabre to be proceed as per section 340 0f the cr. P c. 1973 - chief Judicial Magistrate committed serious misconduct and dereliction of duty - Disciplinary authority of chief Judicial lvagistrate is Administrator, Union Territory of L-akshadweep and shourd be praced under suspension pending enquiry).

¶89

lA NO: 1 oF 2024

¶90

Petition under Section 151 ctrc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to issue the appropriate directions kr the Registrar Vigirance High court of Telangana at Hyderabad r.s to initiate the disciprinary proceedings against the Honble Junior Civil Judge Sri p.ll.Kiran Kumar, Junior Civil Judge Cum Metropolitan lVlagistrate, passed ord,:rs in lA.No.5g8 of 2024 in OS.No.6gg of 2022 dated 0g 05-2024. the Honbre Junior civir Judge Smt p.Devi

¶91

'Vahasa.

¶92

Junior Civil Judge cum Metropolitan Magistrate, Chevella Ranga Reddy District, passed orders lA.No.2010o 2022 in OS.NO.68B ol 2022 dated 23.01 .2023.

¶93

lA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶94

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 leave to me file the docket order dated 09-08-2024, passed by the Hon'ble Junior Civil^judge, Ranga Reddy District at Chevella, in lA. No. 164312024 in OS No.68812022, and pass

¶95

lA NO: 3 OF 2024

¶96

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 for the reasons staled in the Latter dated 10.09.2024 in Lr.Dis.No. 8g'l24, forwarded by the Junior Civil Judge, Chevella, Ranga Reddy District praying this Hon'ble High Court to grant extension of time for further period of two (2) weeks to dispose the applications under Order^'l Rule^'10 CPC in lA.No.543 of 2024 in OS.No.686 ot 2022. lA.No.544 of 2024 in OS.No.687 of 2022 and 1A.No. 1242 of 2024 in OS.No.6BB of 2022.

¶97

lA NO: 5 OF 2024

¶98

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 lo direct the Section to furnrsh the copy of the Orders dated 11.11.2024 and 19.1'l .2024, by way of granting the liberty for preferring the Special Leave Petition under Article 136, 142, 129, of the lndian Constitution before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of lndia, by the Petitioner A. Ushi Reddy, Supreme Court Advocate.

¶99

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.USHI REDDY [PARTY-IN-PERSON]

¶100

Counsel for the Respondents: --

¶101

WRIT PETITION NO: 27841OF 2024

¶102

Between:

¶103

Sri Ushi Reddy Anugu, S/o. Sri Late. Parma Reddy^{Anugu, Aged about50} years, Occupation. Advocale, PERMANENT Address. Rl/o. H.^{No. 7-4,} Bayyanagud6m Village, Mahalingapuram, 9ram^Panchayat, _Stanka.rpally Maridal, Ranga Redcly District, Telangana State,^{PRESENTLYR:/o. H. No.} 16-2-14516417, (New 648) ,\nand Nagar colony,^{N4alakpet, Hyderabad -} 500036, Telangana State

¶104

...PETITIONER

¶105

AND

¶106

1 The Hon'ble Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy^{District at Chevella, Stateof} Telangana.

¶107

2 Sri P-8. Kiran Kumar, Junior bivil Judge-Cum-Metropolitan,^{Ivlagistrateat} Chevella, Ranga Reddy District, State of Telangana.

¶108

3 The Hon'ble Smt. P. Devi Nrlanasa, Junior Civil Judge-Cum-Metropolitan, lvlaqistrate at Chevella, R. R. District^{(Previously),} ll Addl^{Junior Civil Judge-} Cuh-ll Addl. Metropolitan lvlagistrate, Malkajgiri Court^{fVledchal District,} (Present) State of Telanganq.

¶109

4 Anugu Pushpalatha, Wo. Subhakar Reddy, Aged about _33 .^{years, Occ.} Hou6ewife, R/o. H. No., 7-4, tlayannagud em, Shankarpally,^{Dhobipet, Ranga} Reddy, Telangana 501203.

¶110

5 Smt. Murthi Parvathamma @ Chandra Mani, W/o. Murthi^{Ninga Reddy,aged} about 65 years, Occupation. l-lousewife, Permanent^Fyo H^{No. 1-74,Huggelli} Village, Ziheerabad Mandal, Sanga Reddy District, Presently^{R/o. H. No.1-6-} 106/l , Plot No. 159, Sai Ram colony, Behind Sai Baba^{Temple,Zaheerabad'} 502318, Sanga Reddy Districl, State of Telangana.

¶111

...RESPONDENTS

¶112

Petition under Article 226 o' the Constitution of lndia^{praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidrrvit filed therewith,^{the High Courtmay be} pleased to issue a Writ or Order or Direction more^particularly a Writ of Certiorari, declaring the inaction o'' the^{first respondentthe Hon'ble Junior Civil} Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at Chevella, State of Telangana,^{praying to issue a} Writ of Ce(iorari quashing the lA. 544/2024 dated 18.09.2024, filed by^{third party} stranger non alienating^person Uro.^'1 Rule 10 CPC,^{in the Suit for Specific} Performance in O.S. No. 68712022 in compliance of the^{Hon'ble SupremeCourt} directions, NON ALIENATING MEI]IBERS OF JOINT FAIVILY^{HAVE NO LOCUS} STANDI TO CONDUCT THE SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORTV1ANCE^IN CON/PLIANCE OF THE LAW DECLARED BY THE HONOURABLE^SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IS PRECEDENT AND BINDING^{AS PER THEARTICLE141} OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION, OVER THE JUNIOR^{CIVIL JUDGE-CUM}

¶113

METROPOLITAN TUAGISTRATE AT CHEVELLA^{RANGAREDDY DISTRICT,} ".WILFULLY DISOBEYING 2008 AIR (Supreme Court) 2'134, 1998 (1)ALT 496, 2023 ALT 1, AIR 2000 Supreme Courl 2740, 1990 Supreme^{Court 854, 2003(4)} ALT 9, AIR 2006 Bombay 134, 1995(3) SCC 147, 1996(10) SCC 53.^2005(51 RCR (Civil) 697, 1995 (1) RRR 660,2004.2010⁽¹⁰⁾ SCC 512,^{1993 (2) SCC} 740, oblique motive, for some extraneous consideration while^{functioningas} junior civil judge Chevella - 2022 (4) ALT 15 (TS) in view of the directions issued by the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana amounts to^{the contemptof court. lt is a} jugglery, manipulation, manoeuvring or misrepresentation, which has no place in equitable and^{prerogativejurisdictioq.} lf the applicant does^{not discloseall the} material facts fairly and truly but states them in a distorted manner and^misleads the court, the court has inherent^power in order to^{protect itselfand to prevent an} abuse of its process to discharge the rule nisi and refuse to^{proceed furtherwith} the examination of the case on r.nerits. lf the court does^{not reject the petitionon} that ground the court would be failing in its duty. ln fact, such^{an applicant} requires to be dealt with for CONTEMPT OF COURT^{FOR ABUSINGTHE} PROCESS OF THE COURT^(Para 10)^- kindly be^initiated the^contempt proceedings against the Hon'ble Sri P.B. Kiran Kumar, Junior Civil Judge-Cumtvletropolitan, Magistrate at Chevella, Ranga Reddy District^{- Smt. P. Devi} Manasa, Junior Civil Judge-Cum-Metropolitan, Magistrate at^Chevella, R.^R. District (Previously), ll Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum-ll Addl.^Metropolitan Magistrate Malkajgiri Court Medchal District,^{(Present) -Contemptof CourtsAct,} '1971 , Section 1 1 and 12 - Hon'ble Junior Civil Judge committed serious misconduct and dereliction of duty - Disciplinary authority of^{Metropolitan,} tt/agistrate is Administrator -Constitution of lndia, Article^2'1 5^- in^{Para 13 -} wilfully violating the^principles of Natural Justice,^provrsions of Specific^Relief Act, 1963, The petitioner's Suits in O.S. Nos. 687 and 686, 688^are unnecessarily kept^pending by the Hon'ble Junior Civil^{Judge R.R. Districtat} Chevella intending to create third^party interest by^{misusing the powerit amounts} to the abuse of^process of law, wilfully disobeying^{the Hon'ble Division Bench} directions dated 11.07.2024 in W.P. Nos. 17086,^{17091,17093of 2024. fHE} TRIAL COURT MAY IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE^{PENDING APPLICATIONS} UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 1O CPC EXPEDITIOUSLY,^{PREFERABLEWITHIN} TWENTY-ONE DAYS FROM THE DATE OF PRODUCTION OF^{COPY OF THIS}

¶114

t

¶115

ORDER, in compliance of^(2O2O, 2 SCC¹ 73,^{TheHon'ble Supreme Court of} -.lndia held that. To ensure purity and administration of justice, the least that is required is to prevent any ineligible candidate to secure^{appointment on the Post} of Civil Judge (Entry Level).

¶116

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶117

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the affidavrt filed in support of the^petition, tfe^{High Court may be pleasedto} issue the directions to the Registr;ar General Hon'ble High court of^Telanganaat Hyderabad, withdrawal of^judicial rvorfi from Hon'ble^{Sri P.B. Kiran Kumar, Junior} Civil Judge-Cum-[,4etropolitan, Itllzrgistrate at Chevella,^{Ranga Reddy District-} Smt. P. Devi [V1anasa, Junior^t]ivil Judge-Cum-Metropolitan,^Magistrateat Chevella, R. R District^{(Previously),} H Addl. Junior^{Civil Judge-Cum-ll Addl.} Metropolitan Magistrate IValkajgiri Court Medchal^{District, (Present)with} immediate effect, until disposal of the^present Writ Petition.

¶118

lA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶119

Petitron under Section 151 3PC^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of tl-re^petition, the High Court^{may be pleasedto} Stay all further^proceedings of the orders^{dated18.09.2024passed by the} Hon'ble Junior Civil Judge-Cum-tvletropolitan, Magistrate at Chevella,^Ranga Reddy Distnct rn l A No. 544 of 2024, filed by Anugu Pushpalatha^{u/o. i rule 10} CPC, third^party, stranger, NON ,qLIENATING MEIVBERS^{OF JOINT FAMILY} HAVE NO LOCUS STANDI TO CONDUCT THE SUIT FOR^SPECIFIC PERFORIVANCE IN COMPLIANCE OF THE LAW^{DECLARED BY THE} HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IS^{PRECEDENTAND BINDING} AS PER THE ARTICLE 141 OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION,^{OVER THE} 'JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM ME-ROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT CHEVELLA RANGA REDDY DISTRICT, WILFULLY DISOBEYING 2Q08 AIR^(Supreme Coun) 2134, 1998⁽¹⁾ ALT 496, 2023 ALT 1, AIR^{2000 Supreme Coutt 2740,} 1990 Supreme Court 854, 2003(4) ALT 9, AIR 2006 Bombay^{134, 1995(3)SCC} 147, 1996(10) SCC 53. 2005(51 RCR (Civil) 697, 1995^(1)RRR 660, 2004. 2010 (10) SCC 512, 1993 (2) SCC 740, she is non alienating^person, as a^proposed

¶120

defendantNo.3,inthesuitforSpecificPerformanceo.S.No.68Tl2o22during '' pendency of the present Writ Petition.

¶121

A NO: 4 OF 2024

¶122

Petition under section^{'1 51 cPC prayingthat in the circumstances stated} in the affidavit filed^{in supportof the petition,the Highcourt may be pleasedto} directtheSectiontofurnishthecopyoftheordersdatedll.ll.2024and 19.11.2024, by^way of^{granting the libertyfor preferring the SpecialLeave} Petition under Article^{136,142, 129, of the lndianconstitutionbefore the Hon'ble} Supreme Court of^{lndia, by the Petitioner A' Ushi Reddy, Supreme Court} Advocate.

¶123

Counsel for the^{Petitioner:SRIA.USHIREDOY[PARTY'IN-PERSONI}

¶124

Counsel for the Respondent^{No:4: SRI V.VENKATA MAYUR}

¶125

WRIT PETITION NO:^{27849 0F 2024}

¶126

Between:

¶127

Sri Ushi Reddy^{Anugu,S/o. Sri LateParma-Reddy Anug!' Aged about50} v"ro, O"irp6tion.^{{dvoCate,PERMANEN^T Address FJo HNo T-4'} 6"rlylnr-g"r"olr'Viirage, -Minatingapuram, Gram Panchavat' .Slankarpallv Mrh1fil; hansa ReddVDistrict.^{T"elinganaState' PRESENTIY,,ry9} l^ry" 16-2-1451641l-,^{(New'648)Anand Nagar colony, Ivlalakpet' HyoeraDao-} 500036, Telangana State

¶128

...PETITIONER

¶129

AND

¶130

1 The Honble Junior^{civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at chevella,State of} Telangana.

¶131

2 The Honble sri P.B.^{Kiran Kumar, Juniorcivil Judge-cum-ltiletropolitan,} lrtrgi.Gte at Chevella,^{Ranga Reddy District' State of Telangana'}

¶132

The Honble Smt.^{P. Devi Manasa,JuniorCivilJudge-Cum.Metropolitan,} l/aoistrate at Chevella,^{R. R. District (Previously).ll Addl Juniorulvrl Juoge-} c;xl_ti' Ad;i^{-rtl"i.6ritin 'Masistrate,Matraj!iricourtMedchalDistrict,} (Present) State of Telangana.

¶133

4 Anuqu Pushpalatha,^{W/o. Subhakar Reddy,^Aged about-33.years' Occ'} iiliiB"*ir", f,o. n.^{uo. 7-4, Bavannagudem,shankarpallv, Dhobipet'Ranga} Reddy, Telangana^{501 203.}

¶134

5 Smt. Chiranii Sabitha,^{W/o. Chiranji Madhav Reddy, Aged about55 years'} 6'.ir#iii,1.''n"o:rdililii",'^{nvo. pui(ai Virtaseand'Maidal, sanga Reddv} Distriat, Telangana State.

¶135

...RESPONDENTS

¶136

Petition under Article 226 <>f the Constitution of lndia^praying that in the .,circumstances stated in the afficlavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or Orcler or Direction more particularly a Writ of Certiorari, declaring the inaction of the first respondent the Hon'ble Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at Chevella, State of Telangana,^praying to issue^a Writ of Certiorari quashing the lA. 543/2024 dated 18.O9.2024, filed by third^party stranger non alienating^person L /o. 1 Rule^'1 0 CPC, in the Suit for Specific Performance in O.S No. 68612022, in compliance of the Hon'ble Supreme Court directions, NON ALIENATING MEhIBERS OF JOINT FAMILY HAVE NO LOCUS STANDT TO CONDUCT THE SUIT FOR SPECTFTC PERFORI/ANCE lN COMPLIANCE OF THE LAW DECLARED BY THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IS PRECEDENT AND BINDING AS PER THE ARTICLE¹⁴¹ OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION, OVER THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE.CUN/ METROPOLITAN IVAGISTRATE, AT CHEVELLA RANGA REDDY DISTRICT, WILFULLY DISOBEYING 2008 AIR (Supreme Court) 2'134, 1998 (1)ALr 496, 2023 ALT 1, AIR 2000 Supr6me Coun2740, 1990 Supreme Court 854, 2003(4) ALT 9, AIR 2006 Bombay 134, 1e95(3) SCC 147, 1996(10) SCC 53.2005(51 RCR (Civil) 697, 1995 (1)RRR 660,2004.2010 (10) SCC 512, 1993 (2) SCC 740, oblique motive. for some extraneous consideration while functioning as junior civil judge Chevella - 2022 (t.) ALT 15 (TS) in view of the directions issued by the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana amounts to the contempt of court. lt is a jugglery, manipulation, manoeuvring or misrepresentation, which has no place rn equitable and^{prerogativejurisdiction.} lf the applicant does not disclose all the material facts fairly and truly but stirtes them in a distorted manner and misleads the court, the court has rnherent power in order to protect itself and to^prevent an abuse of its process to discharge the rule nisi and refuse to^proceed further with the examination of the case on merits. lf the court does not reject the^petition on that ground the court would be failing in its duty. ln fact, such an applicant requires to be dealt with for CO\TEMPT OF COURT FOR ABUSING THE PROCESS OF THE COURT (Pera 10) - kindly be initiated the contempt proceedings against the Hon'ble Sri P.B. Kiran Kumar, Junior Civil Judge-CumMetropolitan, lVlagistrate at Cheve:lla, Ranga Reddy District - Smt. P. Devi Manasa, Junror Civil Judge-Cum-ll4etropolrtan, Magtstrate at Chevella, R. R. District (Previously), ll Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum-ll Addl. lvletropolitan

¶137

Magistrate Malkajgiri Court Medchal District, (Present)^-Contempt of Courts Act, -, 197'l , Section 11 and 12 - Hon'ble Junior Civil Judge committed serious misconduct and dereliction of duty - Disciplinary authority of Metropolitan, Magistrate is Administrator -Constitution of lndia, Article 215 - in Para^{'13 -} wilfully violating the principles of Natural Justice, provisions of Specifrc Relief Act, 1963, The petitioner's Suits in O.S. Nos. 687 and 686, 688 are unnecessarily kept pending by the Hon'ble Junior Civil Judge R.R. District at Chevella intending to create third^party interest. by misusing the^power it amounts to the abuse of process of taw, wilfully disobeying the Hon'ble Division Bench directions dated^'1 1.07.2024 in W.P.. Nos. 17086, 17091, 17093 ot 2024. fHE TRIAL COURT MAY IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE PENDING APPLICATIONS UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 1O CPC EXPEDITIOUSLY, PREFERABLE WITHIN TWENTY-ONE DAYS FROIV1 THE DATE OF PRODUCTION OF COPY OF THIS ORDER, in compliance ot (2020) 2 SCC 173, The Hon'ble Supreme Court of lndia held that. To ensure purity and administration of^justice, the least that is required is to prevent any in6ligible candidate to secure appointment on the Post of Civil Judge (Entry Level).

¶138

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶139

Petition under Section^'1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased to issue the directions to the Registrar General Hon'ble High court of Telangana at Hyderabad, withdrawal of^judicial work from Hon'ble Sri P.B. Kiran Kumar, Junior Civil Judge-Cum-ltr'letropolitan, Magistrate at Chevella, Ranga Reddy District^- Smt. P. Devi Manasa, Junior Civil Judge-Cum-Metropolitan, Magistrate at Chevella, R. R. District^{(Previously),} ll Addl. Junior Civil Judge-Cum-ll Addl. Metropolitan It/agistrate Malkajgiri Court Medchal District,^(Present) with immediate effect, until disposal of the^present Writ Petition.

¶140

lA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶141

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 Stay all further proceedings of the orders dated 18.09.2024^passed by^the Hon'ble Junior Civil Judge-Cum-lr/etropolitan, Magistrate at Chevella, Ranga

¶142

Reddy District in l A. No. 543 of 2024, filed by Anugu Pushpalatha u/o. 1 rule 10 -. CPC, third party, stranger, NON ALIENATING MEMBERS OF JOINT FAMILY HAVE NO LOCUS STANDI TO CONDUCT THE SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORIVIANCE IN COIMPLIANCE OF THE LAW DECLARED BY THE HONOURABLE SUPREIVE COUIIT OF INDIA IS PRECEDENT AND BINDING AS PER THE ARIICLE 141 OT: THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION, OVER THE JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT CHEVELLA RANGA REDDY DISTRICT, WILFULLY DISOBEYING 2008 AIR (Supreme Court) 2134, 1998 (1)ALT 496, 2023 ALf 1, AIR 2000 Supreme Court 2740, 1990 Supreme Court 854, 2003(4) AlT I, AIR 2006 Bombay 134, 1995(3) SCC 147, 1996(10) SCC s3. 2005(51 RCR (Civil) 697, 1995 (1)RRR 660,2004. 20'10 (10) SCC 512, 1993 (2) SCC 740, she is non alienating person, as a proposed defendant No. 3, in the Suit for Slrecific Performance O.S. No. 68612022 during pendency of the present Writ Petition.

¶143

lA NO: 4 OF 2024

¶144

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of tre petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Section to furnrsh the copy of the Orders dated 1 1 .11.2024 and 19.11.2024, by way of permitting the liberty for preferring the Special Leave Petition under Article 136, 142, 12t), of the lndian Constitution before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of lndia, by the Petitioner A. Ushi Reddy, Supreme Court Advocate.

¶145

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A.tlSHl REDDY [PARTY-IN-PERSON]

¶146

Counsel for the Respondent No,4: SRI V.VENKATA MAYUR

¶147

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶148

,i I

¶149

k

¶150

THE HOI{OURABLE SRI^{JI'STTCE P.SAM TOSIIY}

¶151

AITD

¶152

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICENARSII|G RAO I{ANDIKONDA}

¶153

Writ Petition No.27838.^{17086,17091,L7093.27a4L &} 27a49 ol2o24

¶154

coMMON ORDER: ftter^{Hon'bleSri Justice P.SAMKOSHY)}

¶155

Since the issue arising in^{the instant batch of writ} petitions is one and the^{same,we proceed to decide the batch of} writ petitions by this^{Common Order.}

¶156

Heard Mr. A. Ushi^{Reddy (Parfy-in-Person)in all the writ} petitions; and Mr.V. Venkata^{Ma5rur,learned counselfor} respondent No.4 in^{Writ Petition Nos.27838,27841 and 27849} of 2024. The petitioner,^{as pa-rty-in-person,is representinghis} case personally and^{is appearing as Party-in-Personin all the} writ petitions.

¶157

The instant batch of^{writ petitions is filed by the same} petitioner with similar, if not,^{identicalreliefs.}

¶158

For convenience, the facts^{in Writ Petition No'27838 of} 2024 are discussed hereunder.

¶159

2

¶160

sp-27834_2024&batch PSK,J & NI{R,J

¶161

The petitioner in th'l instant writ petition seems to be aggrieved of the order dated 18.09.2024 in I.A.No. 1242 of 2024 in O.S.No.688 of 2022 pas;sed by the Junior Civil Judge-cumJudicial Magistrate of First Class at Chevella, Ranga Reddy district lfor short, 'the impugned order').

¶162

The impugned order is one where the Trial Court has allowed the application fibd by respondent No.4 herein, viz., I.A.No.1242 of 2024 in O.S.No.688 of 2022, i.e.. an application filed by respondent No.zl. (implead petitioner / proposed defendant before the frial Court) under Order I Rule 10 read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 praying the Trial Court to implead the respondent No.4 as defendant No.2 in O.S.No.688 of 2022.

¶163

Initially, the suit O.S.No.688 of 2022 was filed by the petitioner herein (plaintiff) rrnder Section 26 Order VII Rule 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 seeking for specific performance of an Agree.ment of Sale, for a permanent injunction, and to declare ttLe plaintiff ald defendalt as Class-I legal heirs.

¶164

3

¶165

wg:27A3A-2O24&batch PSK'., & NNR'J

¶166

8 when the instant batch bf .r,attEri iirie^{up-Ior hiAfifiE'Itf} admission on 11.lL.2O24 along^{with Civil RevisionPetition} Nos.717, 719 and^{72O of 2023, a learned Division Bench of this} Court has made a^{categorical observation that the instant batch} of writ petitions filed by the^{petitioner.underArticle 226 of the} Constitution of India would^{not be maintainable,and that the} petitioner (then as party-in-person)^{may file an appropriate} application for modiltcation /^{conversionof the batch of writ} petitions. For ready reference, the^{Docket Orderdated} Ll.ll.2}24 passed^{by the learned DivisionBenchis extracted as} under, viz.,

¶167

"Si A. Ushi^{Reddg, Partg-in-Perso4is present-He} prags for and undertokes to delete tte^{name of respondent} Nos.2 and 3 from the onay^{of parties.He slall deletetheir} names u-tithin seuen days.^{Duingthe courseoJ heaing' he} submits that order dated.^{18-O9-2O24 (Aruentre P-3) i's the} subject matter of^{chotlenge.The properremedg} for^the petitioner(s) is to file Ciuit^{Reuision Petitionand not a petition} under Article 226 of^{the Constitutionof India- The partg-in-} person mdA file an appropiote^application for^{modification/} anuersion of tle Petitions.

¶168

List on 19.1 1.2O24."

¶169

:24::

¶170

wp_27838_2O24&batch PSK,J & NITR.J

¶171

Subsequently, the ba.tch of writ petitions carne up for hearing on 19.11.2024 befrrre the sarne Division Bench which had earlier passed the aborre order on 1L.11.2O24. Again, the Iearned Division Bench reiterated that the proper recourse for the petitioner is to move an appropriate application seeking for conversion of the instant batch of writ petitions into Civil Reyision Petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as is the nomenclature of petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India given by this Court under the Rules.

¶172

lO. For ready reference, tne Docket Order dated 19.11.2024 passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court is reproduced as under, viz.,

¶173

"Heard Si A. Ushi Re'ddg, partA-in-person

¶174

Partg-in-person subnits that the petitioner ha^s assailed the impugned order pa.ssecl bg the Triol Court in thi^s batch of petition-s. The petitions are filed under Articles 226 ond 227 of the Constitution of India. Vlten the order of tiol Court b called in question in a petition. filed under Article 227 of the Constitution, the matters are lbted before this Court as Ciuil Reuision Petitions.

¶175

Tte petitioner b acccrdinglg directed to file appropriate application for anuersion of tlLese mallers into Ciuil Reuision

-J

5

I I li It l1 lHn

wp_27E3E-2O24&batch PSK,J &NNR,J

¶180

Httions, sa tlat the ndErs nag^Le l&edbehethzapp@prldl; BencL Let such application be f.led u.tithin seuen dags.

¶181

Li.st thereofier with CRP Nos.717, 719 and^72O of^2023."

¶182

I 1. Thereafter, the matter was taken up for hearing^on 03.03.2025 by this Bench. On that day, the^{parq/-in-person} took time from the Court seeking liberty to^{assail the earlier} order passed by the learned Division Bench on^19.11.2024 (reproduced as above). Thereafter, the matters^{were posted for} hearing to 17.O3.2O25.

¶183

L2. In the interregnum, the petitioner^{herein preferredSpecial} kave Petition before the Hon'lcle Supreme Court^{vide Special} lrave Petition (Civil) Diary No.3649 of 2025 assailing^{the order} dated 19.11.2024 in Writ Petition No.17O93 of 2024^passedby the learned Dirrision Bench of this Court.^{Vide order dated} O7.O3.2O25, a learned Division Bench of the^{Hon'ble Supreme} Court dismissed the said Special^{Ieave Petition along with} Special Leave Petition^{(Civil)Diary No.6625 of 2025 with the} following observation, viz.,

¶184

'?his is a need.less litigation, as the High Court lns^merelg directed the petitioner to file appropriate^{applicotion(s)} for conuersion of hi.s uLit petitions filed^{underArticle 226 of tle} Con-stitrttion of India into Ciuil^{ReuisionPetitiortsunderArticle}

¶185

6

¶186

sp.27Aga-2o2rt&batch PSK,J & NNR,J

¶187

227 of the Con stitution of India. Tle directions may be complied utith by the petitioner.

¶188

Recording the afore-said, tle special leaue petitions, u.thich are dekctiue, are dismi.ss,zd-"

¶189

Subsequently, the matter was taken up for hearing on 11.06.2025. The petitioner (as party-in-person) submitted that, in compliance of the earlier order passed by this High Court and which has also been conlirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme court, he has filed separate Civil Flevision Petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India io:r assailing the impugned order which is under challenge in the ba.tch of writ petitions

¶190

It may be noted thzrt the order passed by the ea-rlier Division Bench of this Court, i.e., 19.11.2024, was not for filing separate Civil Revision Pelitions but with a direction to the petitioner to file appropriate: application for converting the batch of writ petitions into Civil Revision Petitions. But, the petitioner chose to file separate Civil Revision Petitions for the reasons best known to him, and accordingly six Civil Revision Petitions were filed by him in this Court uide Civtl Revision Petition Nos.1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990and l99l of2025.

¶191

7

¶192

i ii I it.tp $

¶193

wp.2783E_2Oz4&batch PSK,J & N R,J

¶194

On 11.06.2025, when the batch of writ^{petltidflS*tfer6} taken up for hearing, the petitioner (as^{party-in-person)} submitted that as he had already availed the remedy of frling Civil Revision Petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, and that hearing in the batch of writ^peLitions may^be deferred for the moment so that petitioner can pursue^the Revisions before the Bench which is seized of the aforesaid batch of Civit Revision Petitions. Accordingly, the matter^{wasposted to} 16.06.2025. On 16.06.2025, when the matter was taken up^for hearing by this Bench, the petitioner submitted that he^has approached the Court of the Honble The Acting Chief^Justice with a prayer to tag the aforesaid Civil Revision Petitions with the batch of writ petitions for analogous hearing. This^Bench granted seven (07) days' time to the petitioner for^getting appropriate orders from the Hon'ble^The Acting^Chief Justice^on the representation that he^{has made, or else the matter wouldbe} fixed on 23.06.2025 on which^date the petitioner^{shall argue the} case on the question of maintainability of the^{batch of writ} petitions particularly in the light of the other Civil^Revision Petitions tleat were already filed by the petitioner.

¶195

E

¶196

wp_27434_2024&batch PS;K,J & NNR,J

¶197

On 23.06.2025, when the matter came up for hearing, the petitioner prayed for time. Accordingly, the matters were adjourned to 30.06.2025, and again to O7.O7.2O25. On 07.O7.2025, the matters were again posted to 14.07.2025.

¶198

On 14.07.2025, when the matters were taken up hnally for hearing by this Bench, the petitioner has produced before this Court an order passed by a learned Division Bench of this Court in Civil Revision Petition Nos. 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991 of 2025, dated 27.06.2025, whereby the learned Division Bench of this court wa6 ple:rsed to dispose of the said Revisions in the light of the submissiorrs made by the petitioner therein.

¶199

lE. For ready reference, the order passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court in Civil Revision Petition Nos. 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990and 1991 of 2025,dated27.06.2025,is extracted as under, viz.,

¶200

"Wh-en the matters are taken up for heaing, learned counsel appeaing for the p<ztitioners had informed the Court that the issue roi-sed in the present Revision Petitior* l'Ll;.s alreody been ctullenged in a batch cf Wit Petitions, i.e., W.P.Nos.27838, 17086, 17091, 17093, 27B41 and 27849 of 2O24, which are presentlg pending before tlis Court. Thc leanted counsel hod fufther^{submitted thflt the causein tlwseRevi-sion Petitions} does

¶201

..o..

¶202

h

¶203

vP 27$ga 2o24&batch PSK,J & NNR,J

¶204

not iiTuiue for adjudi&fioif^{'and lfiEiEfciti, ihb' pA?.ioft:F|E*' "'} permitted to Wrsue their^{remedies in the said Wit Petitiorts} pending before this Court.

¶205

Recording tle aboue submissions, the Present^Ciuil Reubion Petitions are^closed There sholl be no order^{as to} costs. "

¶206

Based upon the^{said factual matrix of the case, this Bench} upon putting a^{query to the'petitioner(party-in-person) as to} how the instant writ^{petitions under Article 226 would be} maintainable, more^{particularlywhenthis High Court itself in} these batch of writ^{petitions has directedthe petitioner to move} an approPriate^{petition for conversionof the batch of writ} petitions into civil revision^{petitions, the petitioner vehemently} contended that as^{regardsthe observationand directiongiven by} this Court for moving^{appropriate applicationsfor conversion of} the writ petitions into^{civil revision petitions he has alreadydone} itbynlingcivilrevisionpetitions;thatthosecivilrevision petitionshavealreadybeendisposedofbyalearnedDivision Bench of this Cowrt^{uide order dated 27'06'2025inCivil} Revision Petition^{Nos.1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991 of} 2025;andtherefore,theinstantbatchofwritpetitionshaveto be entertained^{by this Benchon merits in exercise of powers}

¶207

t

¶208

::10::

¶209

sp_27E34_2O24&batch PSK,J & NNR,J

¶210

conferred under the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issualce of a Wrtt of Certiorai-

¶211

We are not in agreement with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner for the reason that the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated O7.O3.2O25 in Special l,eave Petition (Civil) Diary No.3649 of 2025 had given a direcLion to the petitioner to comply r,vith the order witJ. regard to filing arl appropriate application for conversion of the writ petitions liled under Article 226 of the Constitution of India into Civil Revision Petitions under Article'227 of the Constitution of India. But, the petitioner, instead of complying with the said order, has refused to take appropriate steps for conversion of the writ petitions liled under Article 226 of the Constitution of India into Civil Revision Petitions under Article 227 cf the Constitution of India.

¶212

Therefore, in the aforesaid factual backdrop, we are compelled to take a stand that the instant batch of writ petitions are not maintainable as h:rs been already held by a learned Division Bench of this Court vide orders dated 11.11.2024 and 19.11.2024, and also by the. Hon'ble Supreme Court 'ride order

:: 11::

(

I

wp 27E38-2024&batch

PSK,J & IINR,J

-' dated O7.O3.2O25 passetl. ih' Specidl LeaVe PetitiSh^{-[CiVilfTfrdrf} No.3649 of 2025.

¶219

Another reason why this Bench is not inclined^to entertain the instant batch of writ petitions is that, taking^into consideration the submissions made by the^{petitioner who had} entered appearance before the Division Bench^{hearingthe batch} of Civil Revision Petitions, and during the course of hearing^the petitioner had categorically made a statement that nothing survives for adjudication in the batch of Civil^{Revision Petitions,} and therefore he is not interested to pursue^{the same- The} above observations made by the petitioner in the^{batchof Civil} Revision Petitions can be visualized from the^{order passedby the} learned Division Bench in Civil Revision Petition^{Nos. 1986,} 1987, 1988, f989, 1990 and 1991 of 2025,^{dated 27.06.2025,} wherein all those Revisions were disposed of basing^{upon the} submissions of the petitioner itself. This by^{itself establishes} that the petitioner was not inclined to argue in^the Civil^Revision Petitions rather was bent upon to argue the matter on^{merits in} the present batch of writ petitions. Further,^{when the learned} Division bench of this Court had, at the first^{instance vide its}

¶220

t.-

¶221

i,L2i.

¶222

sp_27AOA 2t2ul&batch PSK,J & NNR,J

¶223

order dated ll.ll.2024 arld 19.11.2024, made it clear that the batch of writ petitions v/ould not be maintainable and that petitioner should file appropriate application for converting the instant batch of Writ Petitions into Civil Revision Petitions, the petitioner did not chose to do so rather he chose to file separate Civil Revision Petitions u'hich were disposed by the Division Bench as per his own submissions

¶224

Therefore, for all the aforesaid reasons, this Bench is left with no other option but to dismiss the instant writ petitions on tJle very ground of non-maintainabi,tity of the instant batch of writ petitions. No costs.

¶225