Writ petition of 2004 seeking certiorari against a Joint Collector order concerning property; interim applications had earlier been dismissed. With no representation for the petitioners across several adjournments, the court dismissed the writ petition 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.
[32ss ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE TWENW SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 5216 OF 2004
Between:
.....PETITIONERS
AND
/
31.Alladi Nagabhusham, S/o.Bala Veeraiah, 55years, Rl/o.Seethaphal Mandil, Secunderabad.
(R - 31 is impleaded as per Court Order dated 31-7-2015 in WPMP.No.18497 of 2015)
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndiapraying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Courtmay be pleased to call for all the records connected with the order in case No.F113476/2003 dt.9-12-2003passed by thejoint collector RRDistrict(29th respondent) and uash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari orany other appropriate writ.
l.A.NO:1 OF 2004{WPM P. NO: 6806 OF 2004)
Petition under Section 151 CPCpraying that in the circumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, the High Courtmay be pleasedto stay the operation of the impugned order in caseNo.F11347612003 dt.9-12-2003 passed by the joint collector Ranga Reddy District, pending final disposal of the main writpetition.
l.A.NO:1 OF 2008(WPMP. NO:13802 OF 2008)
Petition under Section 1 51 CPCpraying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, the HighCourt may be pleased to direct the unofficial respondents not to make anyconstruction or alienation of the Iand pending final disposal of the main writpetition.
Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI J.SURESH BABU(NONE APPEARED)
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 28 : SRI P.SRI RAGHU RAM
Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.29 & 30 : GPFOR REVENUE
Counsel for the lmplead Respondent No.31 : SRI P.SRIRAM
The Court made the following ORDER
/
I/ I
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.52L6 of 2OO4
ORDER:
None appears for the petitioners. perused the record.
"to call for all the records connected. u.tith the order in case No.Fl/ 3426/ 2OO3, dated. 09-12-2003 passed bg the Joint Collector, Ranga Reddg District and quash the same bg issuing a Writ oJ'Certiorai."
2
wP.No.s216#,"N
If the allegation thatthe unofficial respondents are trying to eitheralienates the propertg or rqise construction,the least that is expected of the petitioners is toserue a notice on them before approachingthis Court- Iam of the considered uiew thatthe petitionersrt'tho failed to c6nuince this ?ourtto suspend the operation of order of respondentNo.29, are not entitled to grant of an interim order at this stageafier a lapse of about fourgears to preuent the respondents from enjogingthe propertg,more particularlg in the absence ofproper pleadings."
/
NVSK,J W. P.No.52 i6 OF 2004
t;
-)
5 This Writpetition is of the yeat 2OO4 and the matter 1S specially identified. Therefore, in view the reasons stated in the aforesaid order dated 16.06.200g passed by this Court in WpMp Nos.138O2 of 2OO8 and 6806 of 2OO4 and as there is no representation for the petitioners since several adjournments, this writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
//TRUE COPYi/
SD/. P.Ch. NAGABHUSHAMBA STANT REGISTRAR
To
SEiCTION OFFICER
HIGH COURT
DATED:2710212025
ORDER
"( flE ST4 14:
e
J
,
i 2e unr2p5
.to!
't
n" r.,11q*f-!
WP.No.5216 of 2004
DISMISSING THE W.P
WITHOUT COSTS.
UIL
@ 9o[o t(d
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the Joint Collector's order dated 09-12-2003 should be dismissed for want of representation by the petitioners?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Yadla Ramesh Babu
Yadla Ravinder
R.P. Ramnarayana
Geetha
The Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy District
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division
N.V. Shravan Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
