Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 23021 (AP)

SMT. S. SYAMALA, ANANTHAPUR DIST. v. THE DIST. COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPUR DIST. & 3 OTHRS

WP/4117/2011 · 2025-07-03

Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010324482011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 4117/2011 Between: 1. SMT. S. SYAMALA, W/O.S.ADENNA FORMER FIELD ASSISTANT ACHARPALLY, NOW RESIDING AT RACHANPALLI VILLAGE, SINGANAMALA MANDAL, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DIST COLLECTOR, ANANTHAPUR, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. 2. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR DISTRICT WATER MANAGERMENT CORPORATION, ANANTHAPUR, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT 3. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, SINGANAMALA MANDAL, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT 4. THE JOINT SECRETARY, CENTER FOR DEVELOPMENT STUDIES, A.P. ARD AMR - AP ARD CAAMPUS, RAJENDRANAGAR, HYDERABAD ...RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the orders of the 2nd respondent passed in R.C.No. 30/HR/1072/11 dated 21.1.2011 as illegal, arbitrary violative of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same. IA NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP 5096 OF 2011) 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 suspend the order of the 2nd respondent passed in R.C.No. 30/HR/1072/11 dated 21.1.2011 pending disposal of the main WP. 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P SAI PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. G SESHADRI(SC FOR MPP ZPP) 2. M BALASUBRAHMANYAM 3. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 4117 of 2011 ORDER: Despite the matter listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there is no representation for the petitioner. It evinces that the petitioner has no interest in prosecuting her case. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date : 04.07.2025 SPP 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Writ Petition No:4117 of 2011 Date : 04.07.2025 SPP