Koti Pandu Ranga Rao v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
Cause title
WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO : 4837 of 2005 Between: Koti Pandu Ranga Rao, S/o. Late K. Kankaiah, R/o. Kalla Village & Mandal, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER
AND 1) The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Agricultural & Cooperative (marketing) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2) The Secretary, Agricultural & Cooperative (marketing) Department, Akividu, Akividu Mandal, West Godavari 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 any writ or order, direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned G.O.Ms.No.6 dt.1-01-2005 issued by the 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 19(1)(g) and against the principles of natural G.O.Ms.No.6, dt.12-01-2005 by duly considering the objections of the petitioner dated 04-03-2005 by duly considering the objections of the petitioner dated 04-03-2005 and construct new building for 3rd respondent and to pass such other order or orders justice and consequently set aside Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.B.CHANDRA SHEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR AGRICULTURE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No. 4837 of 2005
ORDER :
Operative part
When the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation on behalf of the writ petitioners. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. _____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY,J 1st JULY, 2009 SUR
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the 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.