Smt Thumula Sulochana vs The State Of Telangana
2025 Latest Caselaw 4930 Tel

Telangana High Court

Smt Thumula Sulochana vs The State Of Telangana on 17 April, 2025

     THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL

                                   AND

           THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA

                    WRIT APPEAL No.430 of 2025

JUDGMENT:

(Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul)

Sri Bhanu Murthy Bala, learned counsel for the appellants

and Sri Y.Nagaiah, learned counsel appearing for

Sri B.Ravichandra, learned counsel for respondent No.8.

2. Heard on admission.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants fairly submitted that the

review petition was not maintainable before respondent No.4

because there was no such enabling provision pursuant to which,

the said authority could have exercised power of review. He prays

for withdrawal of this appeal with the liberty to the appellants to

approach the appropriate forum. However, till such time the

appellants approach the appropriate forum and pray for interim

relief, he seeks interim protection.

4. The other side opposed the same.

5. The writ appeal is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn with

the liberty prayed for. However, so far the prayer for interim relief

for interregnum period is concerned, it is apposite to consider the

direct judgment of the Supreme Court on this point. The Supreme

Court in Kalabharati Advertising v. Hemant Vimalnath

Narichania 1 in paragraph No.22 opined as under:-

"22. It is a settled legal proposition that the forum of the writ court cannot be used for the purpose of giving interim relief as the only and the final relief to any litigant. If the court comes to the conclusion that the matter requires adjudication by some other appropriate forum and relegates the said party to that forum, it should not grant any interim relief in favour of such a litigant for an interregnum period till the said party approaches the alternative forum and obtains interim relief. (Vide State of Orissa v. Madan Gopal Rungta [1951 SCC 1024 : AIR 1952 SC 12] , Amarsarjit Singh v. State of Punjab [AIR 1962 SC 1305] , State of Orissa v. Ram Chandra Dev [AIR 1964 SC 685] , State of Bihar v. Rambalak Singh "Balak" [AIR 1966 SC 1441 : 1966 Cri LJ 1076] and Premier Automobiles Ltd. v. Kamlekar Shantaram Wadke [(1976) 1 SCC 496 : 1976 SCC (L&S) 70 :

AIR 1975 SC 2238].)"

6. In the light of the aforesaid judgment, no interim relief can

be granted for interregnum period. The prayer is rejected. It is

made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the

merits of the case. No order as to costs.

(2010) 9 SCC 437

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

_________________________ SUJOY PAUL, ACJ

__________________________ RENUKA YARA, J 17.04.2025 sa/vs

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL

AND

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA

(Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul)

17.04.2025 sa/vs