High Court for State of TelanganaWP/6147/2013dismissed as infructuous

Ganji Mohan, v. The Superintending Engineer (Operations),

2015-07-28A Ramalingeswara Rao2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH WRIT PETITION No.6147 of 2013 Between:

Ganji Mohan ... Petitioner and The Superintending Engineer (Operations), R.R.East Circle, APCPDCL, Habsiguda, Hyderabad. and others ... Respondents DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 28-07-2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No may be allowed to see the Judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No Marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

3. Whether Their Lordship wish to see the Yes/No fair copy of the Judgments?

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.6147 of 2013 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:

"To issue a Writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondents in trying to lay high tension line over and through the land admeasuring an extent of Ac.4.00 in

Sy.No.582/1/A now changed as 582/E of Shivareddy Guda village, hamlet of Ghatkeshar village and Mandal, R.R.District, owned by the petitioner in an highhanded manner without obtaining consent from the petitioner and also in contrary to the proposal of the 1st respondent vide letter No.SE/OP/RR EAST/Comml./ DCW/ D.No.826/12, dated 07.07.2012, as illegal, arbitrary, unjustified and in violation of Art. 300-A of the Constitution of India and for a consequential direction to the respondents not to lay any high tension lines over and through the land of the petitioner."

In view of the lapse of time, nothing survives for adjudication in the present writ petition and the learned counsel for the petitioner also does not dispute the same.

In the circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to proceed in accordance with law, as and when fresh cause of action arises. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.

_________________________ A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J Date: 28.07.2015 siva