Smt. Waheeda Begum, v. State of Telangana,
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: B.VIJAYSEN REDDY
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2024-11-28. Smt. Waheeda Begum, v. State of Telangana,. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[ 3183 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD . (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B,VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 11194 OF 2015 Between: 1. Smt. Waheeda Begum, W/o Shaik [\,4ahaboob Subhani, aged 37 years, Housewife, No 2-20-612811/1 , Adarshnagar. Uppal , Ranga Reddy Diskict. 2. T. Venkataiah, S/o Rajamallu, aged 56 years, Oce Pvt Employee, No 2-20- 6/2811, Adarshnagar, Uppal , Ranga Reddy District. ... PETITIONERS AND 1 State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintendent of Police, Ranga Reddy District at Hyderabad. The Station House Officer, Uppal Police Statron Ranga Reddy Dist 4. Dr. l\,4. Chandra [\/ohan, S/o late M. Srinivasa Chary, 69 years; Retd. N/edical College Professor, R/o H. No. 4-2-646, Radha Krishna Nagar, Rotary Naar, Khammam. ...
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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent herein in interfering in dispute pending between the petitioners and the 4th respondent . herein in I. A. Nos. 386 and 387 of 2014 in L. G. C. No. 63 of 1998 as illegal, arbitrary, null and oid and for a consequential direction to the 31-d respondent herein not to interfere in dispute pending between the petitioners and the 4th respondent herein. l. A. NO: 1 0F 201 5(WPMP. NO:148 04 0F 201 5 PetitionunderSiectionlSlCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition' the High Court Tay be pleased to direct.
the 3rd respondent not to harass the petitioners by calling to the, police the pelitioners in lA Nos' station in connection with the dispute pending between of the above writ in C'No 63 of 1998 pending disposal 386 and 387 ol 2014 L. G petition. SRI M'V'SURESH Counsel for the Petitioner: No'1 to 3: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent RAO KUNCHEAM SRI MAHESWARA Counsel for the Respondent No'4: the following: ORDER The Court made ffi, Jz "/ HONOURAB,LE SRI B. VIJAYSEN REDDY JUSTICE WRIT PETITION No. 11194 OF 2015 ORDER: (ORAL) Mr. M. V. Surestu learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for further adjudication and the matter has become infructuous. 2. In view of the above no further orders. are required to be passed. The writ petition is disposed of as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs As a sequel thereto, rniscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed. SD/. K.
AMMAJI ASSISTANT GISTRAR \ //TRUE COPYi/ \ SE N OFFICER To, '1 . The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, State of Telangana. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Ranga Reddy District at Hyderabad. 3. The Station House Officer, Uppal Police Station Ranga Reddy Dist 4. One CC to SRI IV. V. SURESH, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to SRI MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, Advocate IOPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR HOI\,'|E, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies I BSR GJP HIGH COURT DATED: 2811112024 ATE D 51 F 'f' 9, (, f ,$f. D e. 2 I\\ ) \t o o zC-) , | oEgr't :,Y ORDER WP. No. 11194 of 2015 DISPOSTNG OF THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS, WITHOUT COSTS fl+ coPrr \o
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.