INTHEHIGHCOURTFORTHFSTAT.E.iF--... (rr" # t" v. MRo
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrar,r,n
Provisions considered
Judgment
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR wRt TPE TITION NO: 43994 OF 2016 Between: ft Hffi{:#:#,3:.sl, il"",l,:'n!J.",',x,,o9,::,s:".,:,Jj,J,"fl :,ff ; AND -| ...PETITIONER J!:|.:,tSIE,:t l*ltffit rep bv its principar secrerary Revenue Department,
The Tahasildar, Saidapur Mandal Karimnagar District.
Kotha Madhusudhan Re, saidapur n,tr;-,iir'xrliiiflt*ffiffig^'r",ni Reddv venkepaly vitrage, ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 0t the constitution of rndia 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 pa,-icurarry one in the nature of writ of mandamus decraring the action of the respondents in issuing the proceedings vide No.B/2428l2015 dated 19.01.2016 mutating the name of the respondent No.3 for the rand in survey No. 312 extent Ac 4.16 gts situated at somaram village' saidapur Mandar, Karimnagar district without issuing any notice and following the procedure prescribed under Rights in rand and pattadar pass Book Act 1971 as arbitrary and illegal and also violative of principles of natural justice and also violative of the ratio laid down in chinnam pandurangam Vs. MRo, serlingampally reported in 2007 (6) ALT 1345 (FB) and also violative of Article 16 and 3004 of the constitution of lndia consequenfly set aside the same or to pass such any other order or orders as this Honble court may deem fit and !t0!0r in the circumstances of the case. i.S 4 OF 201 6) MP. NO: P t.A.N 10F 201 o: Petition under Section 151 CPC Praying filed in support of the Petition' the affidavit pleased to grant staY of all further Proceedings Proc NO. Bl242Bl2O 15 dated 1901'2016 Pending petition or to Pass such other order or orders as this and ProPer in the circumstances of the case that in the circumstances stated tn the High Court may be Pleased ursuance of the order vide disposa\ o the main Writ Hon'ble Court may deem fit tn p the circumstances stated in h Court maY be Pleased to along with translation coPies . 43994 of 2016' IA Nol 10 F 2019 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the affidavit filed in support of the petition' the Hig p"r.it tf," petitioner to file the additional documents which are enclosed along with this petition in W P No Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI RAVI KUMAR VADLAKONDA Counsel forthe Respondent No'1&2 : GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No'3 : The Court made the following: ORDER HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN TPETITION IVo. 4399 OF 207 4 6 KUMAR o RDER When the matte is taken up for heari rer for the petitioner "or.r.t iength, Iearned """t arguing at eeks permission of "ll this Court to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to pursue appropriate remedies as available under law.
2. Permission is accorded to withdraw the writ petition.
Operative part
3. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrar,r,n with liberty as prayeci for. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. No costs. //TRUE COPYII SD/-K. BHAVAN] SWAMY st TANT REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER To,
One CC to SRt RAV| KUMAR VADLAKONDA, Advocate. tOpUCI 2. Two ccs to GP FoR REVENUE, High court for the State of rerangana touTl
3. Two CD Copies. BSK KKS \a HIGH COURT DATED:07 t0712025 1 i-:. sIA ,( 'j ; \-1 /<,, * 29 ME n5 o..,. ,'^ .r- C,J I ,.\\ s', '\ ORDER WP.No.43994 of 2016 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS G-fd k6.
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 withdrar,r,n
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India; Book Act, 1971; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
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.