The High Court of Telangana dismissed the writ petition filed under Article 226 as infructuous, holding that due to the efflux of time, the cause of action no longer survived for adjudication.
Dismissal of the writ petition under Article 226 as infructuous due to efflux of time.
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.
[325s J
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, T}IE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT PET]TIO N NO:45 194 0F 2016
Between:
.....PETITIONERS
AND
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition Under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndiapraying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an crder, direction or writ more particuiarly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia directing the Respondents to demolish thepillars.
I.A.NO:1 OF 2016(WPMP.NO:5s719OF 20101
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, the High Court may bepleased to grant interim stay orders restraining the respondents from proceeding with the raising of pillars till the disposal of the writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI MAHMOOD ALI
Gounsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR MCPL ADMN AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Counsel forthe Respondent No.2 : G.P FOR REVENUE
Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.3 & 5 : SRI TEJASWINI REDDY, SC.
Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : SRI G.MADHU SUDHAN, SC FOR GHMC.
Counsel for the Respondent No.6 : -
The Court made the following ORDER
HONOURABLE SRI IUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT PETITTON No.45794l of2015
ORDER:
Today when the matter has been taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that due to efflux of time, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for further adjud ication.
closed. No order as to costs.
\
To
SD/-U. SUDHA A NT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
SA LS
3 ?,13 33 t";[ " ^tsHAVA-RAo-'stioh"bHM'c, Adrrocate(opuc)
8n-
HIGH COURT
DATED:0610812025
.t-=
. r)^.<br>( 1/.
)-
13 0t1 ?ffi I
. t-
. :;
--r ts ,.". . tt/
ORDER
WP.No.45194 of 2016
DISMISSING THE W.P
AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUTCOSTS. f 0- 4' J-6) r \
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition survives the efflux of time for further adjudication.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mohd. Saquib Qureshi
Mohd. Saliuddin Afridi
Ayesha Begum
Syed Hafeez
Ahsan Ullah
Mohd. Najeebulla
N.V. Sruvan Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
