Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Aitha Venkata Subba Rao vs Tbe Government Of Andhra Pradesh on 15 November, 2024

 APHC010585842013
                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                    AT AMARAVATI                                   [3310]
                             (Special Original Jurisdiction)

                FRIDAY ,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER
                    TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
                                         PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
                          WRIT PETITION NO: 25929/2013
Between:
Aitha Venkata Subba Rao and Others                                       ...PETITIONER(S)
                                            AND
Tbe Government Of Andhra Pradesh and Others                           ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. V RAVICHANDRAN Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS
2. T S RAYALU The Court made the following Order:
The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:
".....to issue appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in constituting the Trust Board with respondent Nos.6 to 8 in relation to Sri Aitha Ramaiah Setty Choultry Singarayakonda as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and without jurisdiction and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and Sections 18 and 19 of the A.P.Charitable Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 and G.O.Rt.No.322, dated 25-2-2012 and principles of Natural Justice and consequently declare that the petitioners are entitled to manage the affairs of the 5 th respondent Choultry......."
2

2. None appeared for the petitioners.

3. Heard Mr.P.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Endowments appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4.

4. On hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the grievance of the petitioners is against the 5th respondent-Choultry, which was demolished by the Government long back. Therefore, he submits that, nothing survives in the present writ petition and the same may be closed.

4. Recording the above submissions, the Writ Petition is closed. No costs.

5. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________ Dr. K. MANMADHA RAO, J BMS