B Sanjeeva Rao vs The State Of Ap.,Rep By Its ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 9908 AP

      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

               WRIT PETITION No.7073 of 2016

JUDGMENT:-

      This matter has been listed under the caption of

"Specially Identified Cases" and pertains to the year 2016.

2.    On 03.11.2022, the following order was passed:-

        "No representation for the petitioner.
        On 20.08.2019, this Court passed the following order:
             "This writ petition is filed to declare the
         action of the second respondent in not granting

permission for construction, even though application has been submitted by the petitioner on 22.09.2015 as illegal and arbitrary. Counter affidavit has been filed by the second respondent stating that the land admeasuring an extent of 25 sq.yards does not belong to the petitioner and the Municipality is the owner of the said land and hence permission was not granted. It is also stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner filed a suit in OS No.593 of 2003 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Juge, Vizianagaram seeking permanent injunction against the Municipality. The said suit was decreed ex parte in favour of the petitioner, hence the second respondent filed an application seeking to set aside the ex parte decree and the second respondent also filed OS No.16 of 2008 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram for declaration with regard to the subject property. Both the suits were tried together and arguments were completed on 29.07.2016.

Learned standing counsel seeks time to get instructions about the status of the said suits. List the matter on 27.08.2019 under the caption „for orders‟."

It is clear from the above order dated 20.08.2019 that O.S.No.593 of 2003 and O.S.No.16 of 2008 were filed by the petitioner and the 2nd respondent in which arguments were completed on 29.07.2016. Time was granted to obtain instructions with respect to the status of those suits. As no one represents the petitioner, list on 10.11.2022. If the petitioner‟s counsel does not appear and argue the matter on the next date of listing, the petition may be dismissed for want of prosecution."

3. On 10.11.2022, the following order was passed:-

"It is represented on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned counsel for the petitioner is unwell and prays that the matter may be listed next week.

List on 17.11.2022, with clear understanding that no further adjournment shall be granted, as the matter is listed under the caption "specially identified cases"."

4. Inspite of the aforesaid orders, there is no representation

for the petitioner today also.

5. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed for

"want of prosecution".

No order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending,

shall also stand closed.

__________________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI,J Date: 29.12.2022 SCS

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

WRIT PETITION No.7073 of 2016

Date: 29.12.2022

Scs