Mirza Jalaluddin v. Manager, BSNL, HUDA complex, Tarnaka
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
Cause title
1 The Area manager, BSNL, Tarnaka, HUDA complex Tarnaka, Hyderabad-520017 2 The Divisional Engineer, (Phones), office of Area Manager Tarnaka, BSNL, HUDA complex, Tarnaka, Hyderabad-500017 3 The Accounts Officer, Office of the Area Manager, BSNL HUDA complex, Tarnaka, Hyderabad-500017 4 Mr.Ramachandraiah, Sub-Divisional Engineer, BSNL Office of Area Manager, BSNL, HUDA complex, Tarnaka Hyderabad-500017 .....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 in furnishing false information to the petitioner and disconnecting the telephone though the bill has been paid causing mental shock and agony to the petitioner which leads to the disturbacne of normal life as illegal, arbitrary, and opposed to the principles of natural justice equity and fair play and consequently direc tthe respondents to pay the petitioner a compensation of Rs.20,000 lakhs for causing mental agony by deceining the petitioner by providing false information and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:PARTY-IN-PERSON Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.(SC FOR B.S.N.L) The Court made the following :
O R D E R :
Operative part
No representation on behalf of the petitioner. Petitioner called absent. It indicates that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Dated: 12-06-2008. (B.SESHASAYANA REDDY,J) Tnb ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK} THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.4665 OF 2006 POSTED IN WEB DATED: 12-06-2008.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
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.