M. Dhiraj Reddy, v. The District Panchayat Officer,

t i [ 3302 ] I

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYOERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) I FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH WRIT PETITION NO: 12245 OF 2012 Between:

M. Dhiraj Reddy, S/o. M. Ravinder Reddy, Aged about 25 years, Occ: Business R/o Ravirala Village, Maheswaram Mandal, R.R. District. ...PETITIONER AND The District Panchayat Otficer, Ranga Reddy District, Nampally, Hyderabad. 1.

The Secretary, Ravirala Gram Panchayat, Maheswaram Mandal, R.R. District, 2.

B. Madhava Reddy, S/o. B. Venkata Reddy, R/o. H.No.3-57, Ravirala Village, Maheswaram Mandal, R.R. District.

3.

RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 oI the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue appropriate order or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of certiorari calling for the records related to the proceedings No Roc. No 8112012-81 (Pts) dated 27 -03-2012 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same. Consequentially direct the respondent Nos 1 and 2 to cancel the permission which was issued in favour of the respondent No 3 in respect of premise bearing No 3-57, Ravirala village, Maheswaram Mandal, R.R' District. l.A. NO: 1OF 2012(WPMP.

NO: 15381 OF 20121 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 {o direct the respondent No 3 not to proceed with the construction in respect of H.No 3-57, Ravirala village, Maheswaram Mandal, R.R. District. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI M.A.K.MUKHEED Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : SRI KISHORE RAO PUSKURU, .

(SC FOR TS ZILLA PARISHADS) Counsel for the Respondent No.3 :SRl. M.SUBRAMANYAM The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PEf,ITION No.12245 of 2OL2 ORDER:

.Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive and no further orders required to be passed in this matter, thereby, the Writ Petition has become infructuous.

2.

Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous.

3. As sequel to it, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand dismissed. No order as to costs. SD/. P.Ch. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// &,'

SECTION OFFICER To,1. One CC to SRI M.A.K.MUKHEED, Advocate. [OPUCI

2. One CC to SRI M.SUBRAMANYAM, Advocate. [OPUCI

3. Two CCs to GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

4. One CC tosRl KISHORE RAo PUSKURU, (SC FOR TS ZILLA PARISHADS) IOPUC]

5. Two CD Copies.

BSK GJP g

I HIGH COURT DATED:1210112024 t 1 He ST4r e.

{ q z C) L o (-) 1 2 rEF 202f

ORDER

.a WP.No.12245 ot 2012 * ') Op,SPAIC\.

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS @o?i4 a I