Telangana High Court
WP/6585/2003 of CH VENKATA LAKSHMI Vs THE SUB POST MASTER AND 2 ORS on 28 December 2004
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 6585 of 2003 Between: Ch. Venkata Lakshmi, aged about 30 years, NSC Agent,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAOWRIT PETITION NO : 6585 of 2003
Between:
Ch. Venkata Lakshmi, aged about 30 years, NSC Agent, No.238779, Resident of 2-2-7, Ganapathi Center, Nidadovole, W.G.District –534 301
AND
..... PETITIONER
1. The Sub Postmaster, Nidadovole, W.G. District.
2. The Head Post Master, Kovvur, W.G. District.
3. The Special Tahsildar, District Collector’s Office, Eluru, W.G.District.
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may bepleased to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 1[st] respondentin not accepting deposits made through the petitioner with license No.NSC238779 without any proceedings of suspension or cancellation of licenseagainst the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative ofArticles 19 & 21 of the Constitution of India and with a consequential directionto the respondents to accept the deposits made through the petitioner.
Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.SREERAMACHANDRA MURTHY
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE
The Court made the following:
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:
Learned counsel for the petitioner filed a letter before the Registry on23.12.2004 seeking permission of the Court to withdraw the writpetition. Permission is accorded.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No order asto costs.
________________
B. Prakash Rao, J
28[th] December, 2004
ka
To
1. The Sub Postmaster, Nidadovole, W.G. District.
2. The Head Post Master, Kovvur, W.G. District.
3. The Special Tahsildar, District Collector’s Office, Eluru, W.G.District.
4 2CCs to Government Pleader for Revenue, High Court Buildings, Hyderabd. (OUT)
5 2CD copies