✦ High Court of India · 15 Apr 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 15 Apr 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
15 Apr 2025
Bench
Length
1,054 words

Petition undor Soction .l S1 CpC praying that in the cirr;uil51,2n"". ,,u,"0 in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court rnay be preased to suspend the rmpu! ned order dated 15-07-2024, pending dispose r of the main Writ Appeal. lA NO:4 OF 2024 Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumsr.ances stated in the dffidavit fibb in sr.rpport of the petition, the High court nray he preased to stay all further procredings in the w.p.No.5716 of 2024, pendi.rg disposar of the main Writ Appeal o lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Between: Marripati Venr'ata Narasimha rao, s/o-Late seetharamara r, aered about 6g years occ Ret red '30vt Emproyee'R/o.sl)iz-srti;il';,agar corcny Bhadradri Kothagudem C istr r:t. AND

1. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...PETITIONER IVlalothu Sree nu. S/o.Vasya,. aged 45 years, R/o.lRam jas Tanda_ chunchupari Vilaqr; and ruarioir, ariJJrroiixoinl!;'d"r"D;i,il;i'iBrr.'gzlT' Kairi Koteswarir Rar, (Died per LR of R-2) K Annapurna IVarripati Annapurna, (Died per LRs Responderts 3 and 4) Marripati Mura i I\4 rnohar, S/o.Seshagiri Rao aged about 48 years Occ Business Rl/o H No .tl 10 Rajaveedr,i eniirrjiiXJtv#guoem District (Petitioner Nos 3 a nd 4 are brought on record as LRs ()f th 3 deceased lmpleaded Petitioner No.2) , i::,-:,':n,tflf;ff3;'1,i.'""lrlJJts Principar secretary rribar \Verrare Dept A p The Additionar Agent to Govt and project officer, I T D r\ Bhadracharam Khammam Dist The Special Dy )olle ctor, T W Bhadrachalam Khammam Dist The Diskict Collr>ctc,r, Badradri Kothagudem District l. ...TIESPONDENTS Petition under siectirn 151 cpc praying that in the circurrstances stated in the affidavit: fired in sup,)ort of th-e petition, the High court ma1, be preased to THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT APPEAL No. 1O57 of 2o24 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul) Sri M.S.Prasad, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Sri Sanjeev Reddy Gillela, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri S.Rahul Reddy, learned Special Government Pleader attached to the office of learned Additional Advocate General, for the official respondents.

2. This intra-court appeal assails the order passed by the Iearned Single Judge in W.P.No.57 1,6 of 2Ol3 dated 15.07 .2024.

3. Learned Senior Counsei for the appellant submits that W.P.No.57 16. of 2013 was abated on 06.09.2017- Thereafter, without putting the learned counsel for the appellant (respondent No.4 in the writ petition) to notice, the writ petition was restored and the impugned order was passed by the learned Single Judge which is the subject matter of challenge mainly on twin grounds' Firstly, it is argued by learned Senior Counsel for the appeliant that the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge is not I /t 2 ./'... t based on any ir rter:: ocutory application. Secondly, r he relief so granted is bevorLd the scope of the relief prayed for in the writ petition. In ad dition, the appeilant was not hearc be'fore the impugned order was Passed. In this backdrop, since the impugned order is :nter'1ocutory 4. in nature and '.he main grievance of the appellant is that the impugned order rvas passed without there being anS application and beyond the reljr:f claimed and the appellant was not heerid, we deem it proper to dispose of the writ appeal by reserv ng libeity to the appellant to file an application for re-calling tk e irnpugned order ald witlr ftrrther prayer to rehear the appellalt for re-calling/modifyingl the impugned order.

5. The other side has no objection.

6. The writ appeal is accordingly disposed of by lese:ving the Iiberty as aforer;aid. However, if such an application is filed by 21.04.2025, tht: k:rrrned Single Judge is requested to rrake an endeavour to d':cide it before the summer vacation, 20:'25' It is made clear that this Court has not expressed an1' opiniorr on merits_of the car;e. No order as to costs. I , J Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stald closed. ,TRUE COPY// SD/- K. SAILESHI INT REGISTRAR J CTION OFFICER The Principal Secretary Tribal Welfare Dept A P Secretariat Buildings Hyderabad The Additional Agent to Govt and Project Officer, I T D A Bhadrachalam Khammam Dist The Special Dy Collector, T W Bhadrachalam Khammam Dist The District Collector, Badradri Kothagudem District One CC to SRI SANJEEV REDDY GILLELA, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI P.VAMSHEEDHAR REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI P.KRISHNA KEERTANA, Advocate IOPUC] Two CCs to ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL, High Court for the State of Telangdria at Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD Copies i' To, 1 2

4. 5-

7. o o BSR GJP w HIGH COURT DATED:1 510+12025 JUDGMENT WA.No.1057 of 2024 ,a1= .r ''' STAT6 )4: : o (j l \. 9 21 APH zu6 f t ( -ii -1- 13a13_.\: DISPOSING ICF THE WRIT APPEAL, WITHOUT COSTS J t q a{ a

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments