The High Court dismissed the writ petition for non-prosecution as no representation was made on behalf of the petitioners despite earlier notices and a last chance listing.
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
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
[34861
WEDNESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO:42592 OF 2015
Between
...PETITIONERS
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndiapraying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court maybe pleased to issue any appropr:iate Writ Order or Direction essentially one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, Calling for the records relating/pertaining to thein DVC No.10 ot 2015 on the file of Honblejudicial Magistrate of First Class,at Vemulawada, Karimnagar District and quash the same
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP. NO: 54914 OF 2015)
Petitirtn 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 stay all furttrer proceedings including the appearance of the Petitioners in DVC No.10 of 2')15 on the file of Hon'blejudicial Magistrate of First Class, at Vemulawadil, Karimnagar District, Pending disposal of the Writ Petition
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. C. NARENDER
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR HOME
Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2to4: --
The Court made the following: ORDER
TrJiE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITIRAMAI(RISHNAREDDY IVRIT PETITION of 2015
ORDER:
No representation on behalf of the petitioners.Even on earlier occasion i.e., on 22.08.2025, there was norepresentation on behalf of the petitioners and the matter was listed todayi.e., on O3-O9.2O25 under the caption "For Dismissal" as a last chanceto the petitioners. Even today, there was no representation on behalfof the petitioners. It appears that the petitioners are nothavingany inclinationto prosecute this case, as sucli, this Court has no otheroption exceptto dismiss the Writ Petition for non-prosecution.
a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, ifany, shall stand closed.
SD/-M. OSMANALI BAIG ANT REG
/TRUE COPY/
OFFICER
To,
B IVI BS \ck
t 'I {.t
HIGH COURT
DATED:03/09/2025
ORDER
1HES
',1. 0 2 !:i:q 7[126
* *
WP.No.4,2592 of 2015
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION FOR NON.PRoSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS
G"k. {,'
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for non-prosecution?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Chinthalatadem Kishan
The State of Telangana
VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
