K.Prakash Rao S/O K.Venkat Swami v. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation
[ 3255 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO: 10269 OF 2014 Between:
K.Prakash Rao, S/o K.Venkat Swami, Aged about 54 years, Occ: Business, resident of H.No.36-1 70/1, Hyderguda, Hyderabad. - ...PETITIONER AND
1. The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rept., by its Commissioner, Hyderabad.
2. The Assistant City Planner, Circle No.9, GHMC, Hyderabad.
3. B.Eshwadal, S/o Late B.Babulal, Aged about 42 years, Occ: Business, Fi./o H,No.'l-2-18315, Domalguda, 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 direct the respondents No.1 and 2 herein not to interfere in the possession of the petitioner over the house No.3-6-138 situated at Himayatnagar, Hyderabad without following due process of law and also without disposal of the petition dated 3-9-2013 filed by the petitioner under Sec.455 of MCH Act, by issuing an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction preferably on in the nature of mandamus.
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP. NO: 12905 OF 2014) 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 No.1 and 2 not to interfere in petitioner possession over the said H.No.3-6-138, situated at Himayatnagar Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI J.SURESH BABU (NOT PRESENT) Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: SRI V.PRAVEEN KUMAR,SC FOR GHMC Counsel for the Respondent No.3: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR Writ Petition No.10269 of 2Ol4 ORDER:
When the matter was posted under the caption 'Specially Identifred Cases, on 29.Og.2O23, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner(s) and then the matter was directed to be listed under the caption .For Dismissal'.
2. Accordingly, today, though the matter has been listed under the caption for dismissal at 3:3O pM, when the matter was called, there is no representation on behalf of petitioner(s). Hence, this Court has no other option except to dismiss the matter for non-prosecution.
3. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
SD/. K.SREERAMA MURTHY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTI OFFICER To,1. One CC to SRI J.SURESH BABU, Advocate [OPUC]
2. One CC to SRI V.PRAVEEN KUMAR, SC FOR GHMC [OPUC]
3. Two CD Copies BSR GJP fr^c..
HIGH COURT DATED: 3OlOBl2023 9t r B L"t o) s , 'J * lu ^5.
\"
c .() \ c * tt
ORDER
WP.No.10269 of 2014 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION FOR NON.PROSECUTION, WITHOUT COSTS 8N&, ,*\t\'t*'