Ramavath Lalitha Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

Ramavath Lalitha Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief adjudicated on merits; the writ petition was closed (no order as to costs) after the Government Pleader for Forests represented, and the petitioner's counsel did not dispute, that the detained Tractor Dozar vehicle (AP24AM4973) had already been released by the respondent officials.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 in non-releasing and detaining the petitioner's Tractor Dozar vehicle (No. AP24AM4973) at the Divisional Forest Office, Nagarjuna Sagar, Nalgonda District, was illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, and whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing its release as per the Telangana Forest Act, 1967.

Court's answer

On the learned Government Pleader for Forests representing, without dispute from the petitioner's counsel, that the subject vehicle had already been released by the respondent officials and that the cause of action no longer survived, the Court closed the writ petition with no order as to costs. No finding was rendered on the legality of the detention.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 29601 of 2024 (High Court for the State of Telangana, Surepalli Nanda, J., decided 28.01.2025): Ramavath Lalitha, owner of a Tractor Dozar bearing No. AP24AM4973, moved the Court under Article 226 seeking a writ of mandamus declaring illegal and arbitrary the non-release and detention of the vehicle by Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 (Forest Divisional Officer, Range Officer and Section Officer, Nagarjuna Sagar, Nalgonda District) at the Divisional Forest Office, alleging violations of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution, principles of natural justice, and invoking the Telangana Forest Act, 1967; an interim application under Section 151 CPC for immediate handover was also on file. Before adjudication, the learned Government Pleader for Forests represented that the vehicle had already been released by the respondent officials; the petitioner's counsel did not dispute the submission. The Court accordingly closed the writ petition with no order as to costs and directed closure of pending miscellaneous applications, if any. No findings were expressed on the legality of the detention.

l32s2l

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

WRIT PETITION NO: 29601 OF 2024

Between:

Ramavath Lalitha, Wo. Kishan, Aged about 38^{years, Occ- Ownerof Tractor} Dozar vide AP24AM4973, Fl/o. H. No. B- 19,^{YerracheruvuThanda,} Tirumalagiri Sagar mandal, Nalgonda District

..-PETITIONER

AND

1 The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary,^{Forest Department,} Secretariat Building, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2 The District Forest Officer, Forest Department, Nalgonda,^{NalgondaDistrict.}

3 The Forest Divisional Officer, Nagarjuna Sagar^{Division, NagarjunaSagar,} Peddavura Mandal, Nalgonda District.

4 The Forest Range Officer, Nagarjuna Sagar, Peddavura^{Mandal, Nalgonda} District.

5 The Forest Section Officer, Nagarjuna Sagar, Peddavura^{Mandal, Nalgonda} District.

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of^{lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith. the^{High Court may be} pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of^{Writ of} Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent^{Nos. 3 to 5 in non- releasing} the Tractor Dozar vehicle of the Petitioner^{vide No. AP24AM4973and detaining} his vehicle illegally in the Divisional Forest^{Officeat Nagarjuna Sagar, Nalgonda} District is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and^{violation of Articles 14, 15,21 and} 300- A of Constitution of lndia and also violation^{of Principlesof Natural Justice} and consequently direct the Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 to^{handoverthe Tractor} Dozar vehicle of the Petitioner vide No. AP24AM497^{3 to him as per the provisions} of the Telangana Forest Act, 1967

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ^petition, the High Court may be^pleased to direct the Respond,rnt Nos. 3 to 5 to handover the Tractor Dozar vehicle of the Petitioner vide No. AP24AM4973 to him as per the provisions of the Telangana Forest Act, 1967, pernding disposal of the Writ Petition

Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl. RAPOLU BHASKAR

Counsel forthe Respondents: GP FOR FORESTS

The Court made the following: ORDER

',^.-t

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

WRIT PETITION No.296O1 OF 2O24

ORD ER:

Heard Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Forests appearing on behalf of the respondents.

The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

\

" .....to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 in non_ releasing the Tractor Dozar vehicle of the petationer vide No. AP24AM4973 and detaining his vehicle illegally in the Divisional Forest Office at Nagarjuna Sagar, Nalgonda District is illegal, arbitrary unconstitutional and violation of Articles 14, LS, 2t and 300-A of Constitution of India and also violation of Principles of Natural lustice and consequently direct the Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 to handover the Tractor Dozar vehicle of the petitioner vide No. AP24AM4973 to him as per the provisions of the Telangana Forest Act, 1967 and pass.......,,

-)

It is^{represented by the learnedGovernment} Pleader^fot Forests,^{aPPearing onbehalf ofthe} that the^{cause of action in the present} respondents Writ Petition does not^{survive for adjudication any} more, in^{view of the fact that the subject vehicleof the} petitioner had^{already been released by the respondent} officials.

The^{learnedcounsel appearing on behalf of the} petitioner does^{not dispute the said submissionmade by the} learned^{Government Pleaderfor Forests appearing on behalf} of the resPorrde^{nts '}

5, Bringing the^{said submissionof the learned} Government^{Pleaderfor Forestsappearingon behalf of} the respondents^{on record' the writ petitionis closed'} However,^{there shall be no orderas to costs'}

As ;r^{sequel,themiscellaneous petitions'if} any, Pending^{in the Writ Petition slgl!_4:o,:!fl9 rlosed'} ----SD/ - L. VIJAYA^LAXMI A GISTRAR I //TRUE coPY//

OFFICER

To,

1 One CC to^{Sfll RAPOLU BHASKAR Advocate [OPUC]} 2 Two CCs^{to GP FOR FORESTS 'High Court for the Stateof Telangana'} touTl

J Two CD^CoPies KKS GJP

eK

HIGH COURT

DATED:2810112025

ORDER

i 1HE STA l€
:J Pz
2BtLir 2t25
l)
I
i.-nrr,

WP.No.29601 of 2024

CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS (w-

a,/ )>^q- 6co1t-s-5