The High Court · 2025

"'RESP.NDENTS t'i ' Petition under Article 226 ot lhe constitution of lndia praying that h the cirfumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to pass a writ, order or a direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the resp lndents particularly Respondent No.8 in having registered a case on the com I aint of the petitioner t' againsttheunofficialRespondentNo.l0underSCsTl'oAActinFlRNo 25112016 dated 3.6.2016 of 9th Respondent Police Statior Hyderabad and not conducting the investigation properly as per law and nrl even arresting the accused despite of the 2nd Respondent District Collect() remarks to all his subordinates upon state sc.sT commissions recommer Jations and the 5 t; ,., . _rh t Respondent National SC comriiissioners preliminary directic,r the 7th Respondent VC and others to take action_ind report him back is ille,l rl and unlaMul! and against the SC ST POA Act-ind in complete violation ,f Articles 14,21 oI Constitution of lndia consequently direct the 3rd Respondent Police Commissioner to takeup further investigation ff"*p"oiting it and also the s,r omit thi action taken report of the 7 Respondent di- per the direction of 6th Il:spondent University : Grants Commission and also dliect the concern Responder t ; to submit the report by enquiring with those person'iwho are there working in f;r:ulty at the point time of Complaint made by the petitioner thereby do justice. :i ' I : , tt. s: s,, fli'' FI:; ffi: f;l-,,' Sj. t.A. NO: 1OF 2017 ft rPMP. NO: 19498 0F 2017) Petition under Section 151 CPC pray the affidavit filed in support oflhe_ writ petiti direct the Respondent Police to, arrest the under the Scheduled Castes and the Sche ing that in the ci tumstances stated in 'I on, the High C(rr rt may be Pleased to Accused R 10 i rthwith by registering duled Tribes (Pr:vention of Atrocities) l Amendment Act, 2015 which .El;Jinto force on 26 Januan' 2016 there by protect the evidence and witnesses totnsure the preliminary iustice and fair investigation tF" fl{rt t$lr f*i -r fi,il *R, [i; li, { tothevictimPetitionerinthefactsandcircumstancesofthecaseandinthe interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D. SURESH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents No.1, 3 & 9: SRI G' ANIKETH REDDY' AGP FOR HO"ME Counsel for the Respondent No.7 : S.C' FOR OSMANIA UNIVERSIW The Court made the following: ORDER f. t, i,t' t: iI' ?6 t], i:. '-::&{i; ''t,i: l:- Sr.' i;.. t:l: [iri ii;, &:.r': . i-::: r l'-: iti. ll_:r, t::: trrriii_ +lf i rt| 1". t-", t .',i-l r ', lil-. fi!.. i rlF' : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUIiARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.15838OF zct 7 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 tf Constitution of lndia seeking the following relief: "...fo pass a writ, order or a direction more particular't nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaclt respondents padicularly Respondent No I in having r case on the Complaint of the petitioner against ttl Respondent No 10 under SC Sf POA Act in FIR N( dated 03.06.2016 of { Respondent Police Station Hyd not conducting the investigation properly as per law ar arresting the accused despite of the 2nd Respon,l Collector remarks to all his subordinates upon sl. Commr'ssbns recommendations and the Sth Responoe SC commlssloners preliminary direction the 7th Resc and others to take action and report him back is unlawful! and against fhe SC Sf POA ACT and ir violation of Articles 14, 21 of Constitution of lndia cc direct the ld Respondent Potice Commissioner to tahc investigation by expediting it and also the submit the a repoft of the 7 Respondent as per the direction of 6th f University Grants Commission and also direct t\ Respondenfs to submit the repoft by enquiring with tht who are there working in faculty at the point time cl made by the petitionet thereby do justrbe and to pass.,. . one in the )n of the gistered a ' unofficial rabad and I not even 'nt District -tt National ndent VC llegal and complete tsequently up fudher lion taken espondent I concern ;e persons Complaint I I

2. Heard Mr. D.Suresh Kumar, learned ( ounsel for the petitioner and Mr.G.Aniketh Reddy, learned Assir; ant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.,l to 4

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits lrat the cause in this Writ petition does not survive for adjudicat (,n and seeks to . dismiss this Writ Petition as infructuous. 2

4. Leamed Assistant Government Pleader takes no objection to the same.

5. Recording the submissions of both the learned counsel, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. To //TRUE COPY// SD/. L.VIJAYA LAXMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER 'l . One CC to SRI D. SURESH KUMAR, Advocate tOpUCl 2. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

3. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Cou( for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

4. One CC to S.C. for Osmania University tOpUCl 5. Two CD Copies MP TKS s? .i.; i:;tr !ir: :{1, itt I : t,. { a.1t: r' ,i, I ? {:..t I , tt,, :: :. ,l; ';. iJtl iti:r t,.: rl- 1!i r itl' ,li;.i . I I HIGH COURT DA-l ED:0310912025 '=;=a==" ti rlr- Sr .t-t 1 .( ii zg,nl|a 'z: a.;:) !1 ,r,i/ P.\i-c,t : t .t ORDER WP.N,I.15838 of 2017 t.: ,: '' .,1 t.' .t. ! i i '5 I J i l 'a i DISMISSING THE \URIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS :,'. : 9 .tG ,n \C * t .ri t., ;9 f I : r t; { I il'' {{': fi,; i t.i: iJ' il,,(1.' tl'it ti ii ttti: ;i.:i" . ,i:)l t. i.. i1 l.l ! : t , :1,t: a:a ra i.1.... t.