| WA 314 / 2016 |
| WASR 83668 / 2016 | CASE IS:DISPOSED |
| PETITIONER | | RESPONDENT |
| KANDIMALLA HARINADH BABU, PRAKASAM DIST.,A.P. | VS | THE STATE OF A.P.,MINES,HYD., & 4 OTRS. |
| PET.ADV. : KRISHNA MURTHY DEVARAKONDA | | RESP.ADV. : BHUSHAN |
|
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B.BHOSALE
AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
WRIT APPEAL No. 314 of 2016
Date: 7.6.2016
Between:
Kandimall Haranadha Babu S/o Narayana
R/o Kondayapalem village,
Ballikurava mandal, Prakasam district
….. Petitioner(s)
And
The State of A P
Rep by its Principal Secretary,
Mines and Geology Department
A P Secretariat, Hyderabad and others
…..Respondents
The Court made the following:
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE
AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
WRIT APPEAL No. 314 of 2016
PC: (Per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Dilip B.Bhosale)
Heard Sri Jagdishwar Reddy, learned counsel holding for
Sri Krishna Murthy Devarakonda, advocate on record for appellant,
Sri S.Ravi learned senior counsel for respondent no.5, learned Government
Pleader for Revenue (AP) and learned Government Pleader for Mines and
Geology (AP).
2. This appeal is against the order dated 19.04.2016 passed by the
learned single Judge in WPMP No. 55131 of 2015 in W P No. 42753 of 2015,
whereby the appellant’s miscellaneous petition for interim order pending the
hearing and final disposal of the writ petition came to be dismissed. We have
perused the order. It is a well reasoned order running into about 7 pages.
Appellant during vacation, made an attempt to seek interim order. However,
his efforts were in vain. The Division Bench in the vacation on 12.5.2016 at
the request of the learned counsel for appellant posted the writ appeal on
1.6.2016. After having failed to obtain any interim order in the vacation, the
appellant filed a civil suit bearing O.S. No. 137 of 2016 in the Court of
Principal Junior Civil Judge, Addanki on 3.6.2016. Mr.S.Ravi, learned senior
counsel appearing for respondent No.5 placed a copy of the suit on record
and after inviting our attention to the averments therein, submitted that the
appellant has suppressed from the Court below, the pendency of writ petition
and the order impugned in the present writ appeal. We have perused the
plaint and we find there is no whisper about the writ petition and interim order,
impugned in the present appeal. We find subject matter of the suit and the
writ petition is one and the same and even the averments are similar. In this
back-drop and for detailed reasons recorded by the learned single Judge, we
are not inclined to interfere with the order. Hence, the appeal is dismissed.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending stand dismissed. No costs.
3. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant would be satisfied if the learned single Judge is requested to hear
and decide the writ petition expeditiously. Hearing of the writ petition is
expedited.
___________________________
DILIP B. BHOSALE, ACJ
___________________________
P.NAVEEN RAO, J
Date: 7.6.2016
Tvk/kkm
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B.BHOSALE
AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
WRIT APPEAL No. 314 of 2016
Date: 7.6.2016
Comments
Post a Comment