Smt. Basava Tarakam Memorial Medical Trust v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
Smt. Basava Tarakam Memorial Medical Trust, N.T.R.Charitable Trust, Road No.13, P.8-2-694/2/2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, represented by tis Trustee Sri N.T.Rama Rao, S/o. Lakshmaiah Chowdary, Aged about 72 years, residing at Banjara Hills, Hyderabad AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER
RESPONDENT
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or directions, directing the respondents to forbear from taking any penal action under the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 with particular reference to Sections 452 and 636 of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act after declaring the same as illegal, void and unconstitutional. For the Petitioner: MR.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO For the Respondents: G.P. FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEVELOPMENT The Court Made the Following :
ORDER:
Sri B.Srinivas, representing Sri S.Ramachandra Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that no further orders are necessary in this Writ Petition. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed as not pressed. ________________
(V.V.S.RAO, J)
18.6.2004 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ }
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955; Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act — ss. 452, 636.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 18 Jun 2004. The bench was V V S RAO.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.