D. Pradeep Ramakrishna v. The State Of Telangana

[ 32es ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY ,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION NO: 1082 OF 2021 Between:

D. Pradeep Ramakrishna, S/o. Late D. Devi Das Sharma, Aged about 43 years, Occ Administrative Officer, RTA, Hyderabad East Zone, R/o.H. No. 10-23,Kompally,Medchal,Medchal-MalkajgiriDistrict ...pETITtoNER AND

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Transport Department, Secretariat, Hyderabd

2. The Transport Commissroner, B.R.K. Ambedkar Transport Bhavan, Beside Press Club, Khairatabad, Hyderabad.

3. The Joint Commissioner, Transport Department, B.R.K. Ambedkar Transport Bhavan, Beside Press Club, Khairatabad, Hyderabad. RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pass any Writ, Order or direction, particularly a Writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in issuing the impugned Charge Memo dated 10/01/2018 in Charge Memo No. 2687N1/201763, dated 1010112018, allegations of irregularities of collection of tax from the individual owners owning more than one vehicle, even when the Committee report dated 0710812015 gave a finding that there is a flaw in the software provided by the 1st Respondent and without the Letter No.

2687N112017, dated 2810712017 addressed by the 2nd Respondent to the Government and without considering the explanation given by the Petitioner on 0810212018, as in a routine mechanical manner, without applying its mind, illegal, null, void, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently quash the Charge Memo No.

lA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to consider the case of the Petitioner as was considered in the case of Sri. K. Srikanth, which was considered in pursuance of the orders dated 21/1012019 0f this Hon'ble court in l.A. No. 112018 in w.P. No. 26061t2018 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. CHINNAIAH REP FOR SRl. VIJAY B PAROPAKARI Counsel for the Respondents: cP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following: ORDER

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.1082 of 2O2L ORDER:

Sri Chinnaiah, learned counsel representing Vrjay B Paropkari, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication and hence, the writ petition has become infructuou s.

2.

In view of the said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.

3.

Interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall also stand disposed of.

SD/.P.CH.NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTATT,REGlSTRAR L-Ji) SECTION OFFICER To, \ /iTRUE COPY//

1. Two CCs to GP FOR TRANSPORT ,High Court forthe State of Telangana,at Hyderabad [OUT]

2. ohe CC to SRl. VIJAY B PAROPAKARI Advocate [OPUC]

3. Two CD copies l BM BS wq.

HIGH COURT DATED:1 110112023 \ ta

ORDER

q r'l L TEB J WP.No.1082 ot 2021 r) * n DISM!SS!NG THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS 6 ay'*s Bsk6[rl,=