Makina Rama Rao v. Visakhapatnam District
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for default
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
Cause title
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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to RC.No.199/94/HA, dt.3-4-1995 on the file of the first respondent and quashing the notification published in Andhra Jyothi Newspaper dt.3-4-1995 proposing to acquire Ac.1.8 cents in Survey.no.157/2 in Gurrampalem Village, Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam Dist. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.N.V.RANGANADHAM Counsel for the RespondentS: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION The Court made the following :
ORDER:
Operative part
When the matter came up for hearing on 30-09-2004, neither the Counsel for the petitioner nor the petitioner was present. Hence, the matter was directed to be listed today ‘for dismissal’. Today also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner nor his counsel was present. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for default. 07-10-2004 Mrkr To
The Collector, Government of Andhra Pradesh Visakhapatnam District.
The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, A.P.I.I.C.Visakhapatnam.
Two C.Cs. to the G.P. for Land Acquisition, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (O.U.T.).
Two C.D. copies.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for default
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 07 Oct 2004. The bench was T MEENA KUMARI.
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.