M. Kannaiah, R.R. Dist. v. Secy., Rev. Dept. And 2 ORS.

[ 3302 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELAN

AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.

TION NO:1 Between:

M. Kannaiah, Sio. M. Subbaiah, Hindu, aged 60 years, Occ : Cooli, R/o. 20-18281A, Papireddy Colony, Serilingampally, R.R.District. .....PETITIONER AND '1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The District Collector, R.R. District.

3. The Tahsildar, Serilingampally, R.R. District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents not to interfere with the property of the petitioner i.e.,D.No.20-1 828/4, Papireddy Colony, Chandanagar, Serilingampally, R.R. District without considering the application of the petitioner dated 19.05.2008 as illegal, arbitrary.

10F 2011 P.NO:1 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 not to evict the petitioner from his residential house

bearing D.No.20-18281A, Papireddy Colony, Chandanagar, Serilingampally, R.R District.

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI V.RAJAGOPAL REDDY Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following ORDER t

r I .

I THE HONOURABLE SRT JUSTICE K.SARATH WRTT PETITION No. L23O of 20lL ORDER:

when the matter is taken up lor hearing on 2'8.LO.2O24, it is informed that the learned counsel appeari4g for the petitioner on record expired. [n view of the same, the Registry was directed to issue notice to the petitioner and the same was unserved on him and returned with an endorsement as 'insufficient address' according to postal track rePort.

2.

In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed for Non-prosecution. If the petitioner has any grievance in the instant writ petition, he is at liberty to file an appropriate petition to restore the same. 'l'here shall be no order as to costs.

3.

Pending miscellaneous applications, ir any in this petition, shall stand closed.

sD/- AHM,=.?iFlHt-bt![HtH I 6t /TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To l.TwoCCstoGPFoRREVENUE,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat ,, tlt"gts JRI"I*JAGopAL REDDY, Advocate loPuc]

3. Two CD CoPies SA TKS YT

HIGH COURT DATED:1 810812025 i. :. lr.. < =i 11!lt! M o WP.No.1230 of 2011 a I a Tcl DISMISSING THE W FOR NON PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS.

G cqfe[ tr 3lttE5