Opp.S.R.V.Junior College, Waddepalli X Roads, Hanumakonda v. Warangal
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
Between: Sri M.Suryanarayana Rao, s/o Sri M.Ramaiah, r/at 2-10-790/11, Opp.S.R.V.Junior College, Waddepalli X Roads, Hanumakonda. ..... PETITIONER
AND 1 The Warangal Municipal Corporation, rep., by its Commissioner, Warangal. 2 The A.P.State Warehousing Corporation, rep., by its Manager, Warangal. .....RESPONDENT(S)
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 a writ of mandamus, declaring the inaction of the 1st respondent in considering the representation of the petitioner dated 15-06-2004 and cancelling the instructions given by it to the 2nd respondent for collection of the rentals for the Godown premises bearing Municipal Nos.16/360/B, (16-3-217(old), 16-3-1006 (New) situated near Petrol Bunk, Khammam Road, Warangal and consequently direct the 1st respondent to determine the municipal tax arrears payable to the 1st respondent in the light of the Provisions of the A.P.Municipal Corporation Act, 1994 read with Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955. For the Petitioner:MR.T.S.ANAND,Advocate. For the Respondent No.: MR.K.VENUGOPAL REDDY,Advocate. The Court Made the Following :
ORDER :
(Per Sri Bilal Nazki, J). During the hearing of the Petition, it came to our notice that the representation made by the petitioner is pending before the respondents. The respondents may consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within six weeks from today. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. 5th July, 2004. ajr. _______________ (BILAL NAZKI, J) ___________________ (P.S.NARAYANA,J) To 1 The Commissioner, The Warangal Municipal Corporation, Warangal. 2 The Manager, The A.P.State Warehousing Corporation, Warangal. 3 Two C.D. copies.
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Provisions of the A.P.Municipal Corporation Act, 1994; Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 05 Jul 2004. The bench was BILAL NAZKI, P S NARAYANA.
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.