Ande Vijay Kumar vs The State Of Telangana
2026 Latest Caselaw 450 Tel

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 450 Tel
Judgement Date : 7 April, 2026

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Telangana High Court

Ande Vijay Kumar vs The State Of Telangana on 7 April, 2026

         HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
                     AT HYDERABAD

     THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI

              WRIT PETITION No.15854 OF 2023

                   DATE OF ORDER : 07.04.2026

Between:

1. Ande Vijay Kumar, S/o Sathaiah
                                                .. Petitioner

        And

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its
   Principal Secretary, Stamps and
   Registration Department, Secretariat,
   Hyderabad and 5 others

                                              .. Respondents

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed with the following prayer:

"... to issue a Writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring declare the action of the respondents in entertaining the registrations in respect of the land in Sy.No.1035/A/AA/1,2 (Ac.1-20gts) and Sy.No.1036/A, AA, 1,2 (Ac.2-20gts) total admeasuring Ac.4-00Gts situated at Bhongir Village and Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir District basing upon the General Power of Attorney Doc.No. 27 OF 1998 though the principals were died as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, violation of principles of natural justice and consequently declare the G.P.A document bearing No.27/1998 as null and void by directing the respondents not to entertain the registrations over the above mentioned lands and pass ..."

2. Learned counsel for petitioner, on instructions, has

submitted that he seeks permission of this Court to withdraw 2 JAK,J wp_15854_2023 the writ petition. This Court, on 06.12.2023, passed the

following order:

"Notice before admission.

Learned Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration takes notice on respondent Nos.1 to 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take out personal notice on respondent No.6 and file proof of service.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondents authorities are entertaining the registrations in respect of the land in Sy.No.1035/A/AA/1, 2 (Ac 1-20gts) and Sy.No.1036/A, AA, 1,2 (Ac.2-20 gts) total admeasuring Ac.4-00 Gts situated at Bhongir Village and Mandal Yadadri Bhongir District basing upon the General Power of Attorney Doc.No.27 of 1998 though the principals were died as illegal and consequently declare the GPA document bearing No.27/1998 as null and void by directing the respondents not to entertain the registrations over the above mentioned lands.

Learned Assistant Govt. Pleader for Stamps and Registration seeks time to get instructions.

List on 03.01.2024, till then the respondent authorities are directed not to entertain the registrations on the subject property."

3. It is trite to take note of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex

Court in Abhimanyoo Ram v. State of Uttar Pradesh and

another 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court at Paragraph No.6, held as

follows:

"6. Any attempt by a litigant to retain the benefit of the interim order by avoiding final adjudication, requires to be deprecated. In fact, it requires to be dealt with sternly. Courts should bestow caution while dismissing cases where interim relief had been granted as not pressed or as withdrawn. The courts cannot proceed on the assumption that all concerned would know about the legal consequences of dismissal and therefore, it is not necessary to make any order in regard to the interim relief already

(2008) 17 SCC 73 3 JAK,J wp_15854_2023 granted. Even though the legal effect of dismissal on withdrawal, is vacation of the interim order, the respondents concerned not being aware of the legal consequences, will not take consequential action but continue the benefit extended to the petitioner by the interim order, unless there is a specific direction spelling out the consequences. Sometimes, the departmental concerned officials, on account of collusion with the petitioners who had obtained the interim relief, will not withdraw or reverse the benefit granted to the petitioner in pursuance of the interim order, when the petition is withdrawn or dismissed as not pressed. Therefore, appropriate consequential directions cancelling or vacating the interim order should be passed so as to restore status quo ante. In cases where the prayer for dismissal (as not pressed or withdrawn) is made even before the respondent is served, then the order vacating the interim order should be communicated to the authority against whom the interim order was issued, so that any benefit extended as a consequence of the interim order, can be withdrawn or reversed. The only exception is where the respondents agree for the continuance of the interim order as a final relief, or agree that the benefit of the interim order already granted need not be disturbed, in which event, the court should record such submission and pass appropriate consequential orders.

4. The said proposition of law was reaffirmed in the

judgment of Kalabharati Advertising v. Hemanth Vimalnath

Narichania and others 2.

5. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner, this Court deems

it appropriate to permit the writ petition to be withdrawn,

subject to the condition that the interim order granted on

06.12.2023 shall stand vacated, in view of the law laid down by

the Hon'ble Apex Court.