← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/3093/2020closed no costs

Sri Vidyaniketan High School v. The State Of Telangana

2020-02-17P.Keshava Rao2 pages

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE P.KESHAVA RAO WRI T PETI TI ON No.3093 OF 2020 ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned standing counsel appearing for Sri Seetha Ramachandra Swamy Templefourth respondent and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the Endowments Department.

2.

The prayer sought in the writ petition is as under: 'For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit it is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to ssue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Orders, Direction or Directions to declare the inaction of the respondents 1 and 2 to consider and dispose of the representations of the petitioner dated 19.08.2016 and 27.11.2017 seeking renewal of the lease of land of an extent of 9955 sq. yards in Sy.No.352/1, Rambagh, Attapur Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, R.R. District, as arbitrary, unreasonable and unconstitutional and to issue a consequential direction to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to renew the lease in favour of the petitioner in respect of land an extent of 9955 sq. yards in Sy.No.352/1, Rambagh, Attapur Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, R.R. District, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.'

3.

When the matter is taken up, today the learned standing counsel brought to the notice of this Court the proceedings issued in Memo No.25739/Endts-II(A1)/2017 dated 29.03.2018. Perusal of the said proceedings would indicate that the proposal for extension of lease of open land of Sri Seetharama Chandra Swamy Temple, Rambagh, Attapur Village, Rajenderanagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, for a period of eleven (11) years, is rejected.

4.

In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the prayer sought in the present writ petition has become infructuous and the petitioner have to challenge the rejection orders.

5.

Accordingly, the writ petition is closed with a liberty to the petitioner to take appropriate steps available as per law. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs. ____________________ JUSTI CE P.KESHAVA RAO Date: 17.02.2020 PGS