MRS. S.K. HARIPRIYA NARESH, SECBAD v. THE STAT EOF A.P., REVENUE DEPT., HYD AND 3 OTHRS
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: K. SARATH
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2024-11-20. MRS. S.K. HARIPRIYA NARESH, SECBAD v. THE STAT EOF A.P., REVENUE DEPT., HYD AND 3 OTHRS. Read...
Judgment text
[ 3302 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction) OF NOVEMBER WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY FOUR TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT SARATH , THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. WRIT PETITIO NNO :4895 OF 2011 Between: W/o S. K. Naresh, RJo. H. No. 39-224, Vavupuri Mrs. S. k. HariPriYa naresh' 594 Malkajgiri, Secunderabad - 500 ... PETITIONER AND Revenue Department' 1. The State of AP, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Secretariat, HYderabad Hyderabad 2. The District Collector, Ranga Reddy District' at t\rlandal, t\/alkajgiri, Ranga Reddy District 3. The Tahasildar, Malkajgiri 4. TheDeputycollectorandRevenueDivisionalofficer,ChevellaDivision, Ranga ReddY District : ...
RESPONDENTS ol lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the Petition under Article 226 circumstancesstatedintheaffidavitfiledtherewith,theHighCourtmaybe the of more particularly one in nature pleased to issue a writ, order or direction proceedings Memo No' E2l6593 / 2010' dated-writ of Mandamus, declaring the contrary to as illegal arbitrary' void and 27 . O1. 2011 issued by the 2nd respondent, law and facts. I. A. N O: 1 OF 2011 PMP. NO:60 68 0F 2011 PetitionunderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to directthe2ndrespondenttoissueNoCwithrespecttopetitionerPlotNo. 40S Village' Ranga and 4O9 in Sy. No. 374 Malkajigiri Mandal, Kannajiguda' Atwal of the WP and pass Reddy District, forthwith pending disposal I. A. N Oi2OF 2011(W PMP.
NO:60 690F2 01 1) petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may, be preased to suspend . he proceedings Memo No. E2l6593/2010, dated 27 . 01 2011 issued by the 2nd respondent, pending disposal of the Wp. Counsel for the petitioner: SRt T. S. VENKATARAMANA Counsel forthe Respondents: Gp FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER l L Y THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATII WRIT PETITION No. 4895 of 2OLL ORDER: This petition is coming lor hearing since 2011. On 3O. 1O. 2O24, when the matter was called, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, and therefore the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption "for Disrriidsal". Even today, when the matter is called, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It seems that the petitioner is not interested to prosecute this case. 2. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed for Non-prosecution/default.
There sha-ll be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any in this petition, shall stand closed. RAO SD/-S. MALLIKARJUNA ASSI T NT REGISTRAR \ //TRUE COPY// N OFFICER To, Advocate tOPUCl T. S. VENKATARAMANA' 1. OneCC to SRI for the State of Telangana 2. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE' High Court touTl 3. Two CD CoPies. BSK tr GJP I HIGH COURT DATED:2011112024 t t{ E SrAr€ o k t , l z B 2025 a 2 JAli . b tt t I DE S'A1 ORDER WP. No. 4895 of 2011 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS A- c', ( \s t 6c"da'
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.