Writ Petition No. 14804 of 2009 · Andhra Pradesh High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Withdrawn
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
Cause title
PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No. 14804 of 2009 Between: V. Ramanjaneya Reddy S/o. Rami Reddy 25/27, Sanjeeva nagar, Nandyal Kurnool District. AND ..... PETITIONER
1 The Superintending Engineer Panchayat Raj, Anantapur , AnantapurDistrict. 2 The Executive Engineer (Panchayat Raj) Penugonda, Anantapur District. .....RESPONDENTS
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 issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.1 issuing proceedings No. AE3/PMGSY-PH-V/2009dt.23-6-2009 canceling the Contract Under PMGSY-PH-V grant awarded to the petitioner in Respect of B.T. Road from Peddapalli to Kondakamarla as arbitrary, unreasonable, illegal, improper and in violation of principles of natural justice and set aside the same by directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to complete the balance work and pay the bills amounts to the petitioner for the work executed already Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI V.SREE RANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.14804 OF 2009
ORDER:
Operative part
Sri V. Sree Ranga Rao, learned counsel representing the petitioner, prays for permission to withdraw the writ petition. Permission accorded. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. October 23, 2009 Note: Furnish C.C. of the order by today. B/O.MD ___________________ P.S.NARAYANA, J
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn
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.