Telangana High Court
WP/7333/1995 of Kondapalli Bemayya Vs Martha Simhachalam on 27 December 2004
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7333 of 1995 Between: 1 Kondapalli Bemayya S/o Kondayya R/o Dasaripalem (V),
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO : 7333 of 1995
Between:
1 Kondapalli Bemayya S/o Kondayya
R/o Dasaripalem (V), Rajavomangi (M),
East Godavari Dist.
2 Kondapalli Arjundu S/o Kondayya
R/o Dasaripalem (V), Rajavomangi (M),
East Godavari Dist.
3 Kondapalli Marinayya S/o Kondayya
R/o Dasaripalem (V), Rajavomangi (M), East Godavari Dist. East Godavari Dist.
AND
..... PETITIONERS
1 Martha Simhachalam S/o Nagaraju
R/o Dusaripalm (V), Rajavomangi (M),
East Godavari Dist.
2 The Mandal Revenue Officer
Rajavomangi (M), E.G. Dist.
3 The Agent to Govt.
Govt. of A.P., Kakinada, E.G. Dist.
.....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 an order or a direction or a writ more particularly in the natureof writ of "Certiorari" Quashing the order of the Agent to Govt. of A.P. EastGodavari at Kakinada passed in C.M.A.No.29/91 on his file dated 25-3-1995.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.Y.VESWESWARA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 & 3: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE
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:
When the case was listed for hearing, on 22.12.2004, as there wasno representation on behalf of the petitioners, it is posted ‘fordismissal’. Even today, when the matter is called, there is norepresentation on behalf of the petitioners.
In that view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs.
______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J
27.12.2004DR
To
2 The Mandal Revenue Officer
Rajavomangi (M), E.G. Dist.
3 The Agent to Govt.
Govt. of A.P., Kakinada, E.G. Dist.
4 2CCs to Government Pleader for Social Welfare, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT)
5 2CD copies