High Court for State of TelanganaWP/9086/2015withdrawn

Mohammad Suleman, v. State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.By Its Principal Secretary

2016-01-06C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy2 pages

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.9086 of 2015 Dated 06th January, 2016 Between:

Mohammed Suleman and others

...Petitioners

And State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayat Raj, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others

...Respondents

Counsel for the petitioners: Sri P.Keshava Rao Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP for Panchayat Raj Counsel for respondent Nos.3, 7 & 8: Sri P.Roy Reddy Counsel for respondent Nos.4 & 10: AGP for Revenue Counsel for respondent Nos.5 & 6: GP for Municipal Administration Counsel for respondent No.9: Sri Ravi Cheemalapati Counsel for respondent No.11: Sri K.Chaitanya Counsel for respondent No.12: Mrs.Deepika Gadde The Court made the following:

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief: "...to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of Respondent Nos.11 and 12 in making constructions, in utter violation of the terms and conditions laid down under Technical Layout Pattern-TLP No.02/2013/R dated 11.01.2013 issued by the 5th respondent, violative of G.O.Ms.No.67 PR & RD Dt.26.02.2002 and violative of G.O.Ms.No.274 PR & RD dated 12.06.2007, as arbitrary, illegal, unjust, violative of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed to the Petitioners under Articles 14, 19 (1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside TLP No.02/2013/R dated

11.01.2013 issued by the 5th respondent."

Sri P.Keshava Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, addressed letter, dated 05.01.2016, to the Registrar (Judicial), wherein it is mentioned that due to certain technical errors in the writ petition, his clients are advised to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh writ petition. At the hearing, the learned counsel reiterated this request.

Sri P.Roy Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for APIIC, while submitting that the writ petition itself may not be maintainable, has however fairly not objected to the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners.

In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners in terms of the prayer made. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, WP.M.P.Nos.11978, 11979, 11980, 14744, 14745, 14746, 35661 and 35662 of 2015 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 06th January, 2016 VGB