✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court

Murthy v. 2 The Deputy Transport Commissioner, Nellore

Writ Petition No. 11470 of 2008N V RAMANA

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

Between: Sri Sai Venkataramana Constructions (Engineering Contractors), 3/457, Lakshmi Puram, Nellore - 524002. rep. by its Authorised person Sri G.V. Chalapathi Rao S/o. Krishna Murthy, Aged about 46 years, R/o. Vidyadharapuram, Vijayawada. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Transport Officer, Nandyal, Kurnool District. 2 The Deputy Transport Commissioner, Nellore. .....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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents to release vehicles bearing registration Nos.AP 26W 9706 GV, AP 26 W 8825 GV, AP 26 W 9709 GV and AP 26 W 9705 GV which are lying at Panyam Police Station, Panyam of Kurnool District forthwith, declaring the action on the part of the respondents as arbitrary, illegal and ultravires to the provisions of Article 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.S.R.ANJANEYALU Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 11470 of 2008 Order: Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach the competent appellate authority for redressal of its grievance. Permission is accorded, and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent appellate authority for redressal of its grievance. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 15.07.2008 Nsr

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Andhra Pradesh High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 11470 of 2008). ← Search more judgments