Business v. The District Collector Nizamabad
Case at a glance
- Bench
- SUDDALA
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Judgment
Cause title
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of first respondent in issuing impugned Proceedings No. f11163212010 dated 15.02.2013 as arbitrary, illegal and set aside the same l.A. NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP. NO 7131 0F 2013) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cirbumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of proceedings No. fll1632/2010 dated 15.02.2013 issued by first respondent, pending disposal of the above writ petitioil Counsel for the Petitioner:
Ms. K. V. RAJASREE Counsel for the Respondent No. 'l: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI V. SAWAM REDDY, SC FOR NIZAMABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CH,q LAPATHI RAO
WRIT PETITION NO.574O of 2O.L i
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed praying this Co rrt to rssue a r.r'rit of maldamus declaring the action of res,l ondent No.1 in issuing the impugned proceedings No.f . 1632 l2OlO, dated I5.02.2013 as illegal, arbitrary and to ,r:t aside the
As seen from the contents of the a-flida\ i , the limited grievance of the petitioner in this '"vrit pe t :ion is that respondent No.I had rejected the petitioner's application, u'hich u,as made for grant of permission o keep the buffaloes in the premises for running dairy tr eke out his live lihood.
Learned counsel for the petitioner u,oulrl submit that he is unable to contact the petitioner so rs to knolv u'hether the cause of action would survive or rr )r,
Recording the said submission, this Wr t Petition is closed. Hor.r'ever, liberty is given to the petitio;r 'r to \ \ +-rr!:q -2 challenge the action of the respondents if the cause of action arise or revive the F-resent writ petition in the event the petitioncr coming into contact of his counsel. No Pending miscellaneous applications if any shall stand closed. SD/- M. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASSISTANT REGIS //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER To, One CC to Ms. K V RAJASREE, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI V. SATYAM REDDY, SC FOR NIZAMABAD MUNICIPAL coRPoRATTON [OPUCj Two CCs to GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV ,High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] Two CD Copies 1 2 J 4 BM -JK* HIGH COURT DATED:1 9t09t2O2S ( o.J : l; q Ta / l{,i Tlllt 1 * 4lr: l('' ORDER WP.No.5740 of 2013 CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHCT IiCOSTS 6', ) (q 3-[r f z-c
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.