Telangana High Court
WP/39086/2013 of Regulazgodda Shoran Rao Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh on 31 December 2013
SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.39086 OF 2013 Dated 31st December 2013 BETWEEN: Regulazgodda Shoran Rao. …PETITIONER AND 1. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and five others. …RESPONDENTS
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDYWRIT PETITION NO.39086 OF 2013
Dated 31st December 2013
BETWEEN:
Regulazgodda Shoran Rao.
…PETITIONER
AND
1. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary, RevenueDepartment, Secretariat, Hyderabad and five others.
…RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the petitioner: Sri B.V.S.S. Bala Krishna Ranjit Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5: Assistant GovernmentPleader for Revenue Counsel for respondent No.6:
The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDYWRIT PETITION NO.39086 OF 2013
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed for the following substantive relief.
“…to declare the action of the respondent authorities 1to 5 in issuing the B.C. ‘C’ Community Certificate, as illegal,arbitrary and consequently to direct respondent No.5 toconduct the fair enquiry regarding the original CasteCertificate of respondent No.6 and cancel the communitynativity/BC issued by respondent No.5 in favour of respondentNo.6 after conducting proper enquiry by giving an opportunityto respondent No.6 and initiate necessary action againstrespondent No.6 and his family members for availingGovernment Schemes provided for the Schedule Castepeople.”
After arguing the case, Sri B.V.S.S.Bala Krishna Ranjit, learnedcounsel for the petitioner, seeks permission of the Court to withdrawthe Writ Petition with liberty to his client to file fresh Writ Petition withproper pleadings and material papers.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner in terms of the prayer made.
As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WP.MP.No.48556of 2013 filed by the petitioner for interim relief shall stand disposed ofas infructuous.
_____________________
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
31[st] December 2013RRB