SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 39846

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
Anumula Revanth Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Legislature Secretariat of the State Telangana – Respondent
WP 24430/2016



O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief/s:-

“…Issue an order, direction or a Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaration declaring the issuance of Bulletin no.5 dt.10.03.2016 by the 1st respondent merging Telangana Telugu Desam Legislature Party with Telangana Rashtrasamithi party in Legislative assembly of Telangana State is un constitutional as the scheme of Schedule-X of the Constitution of India or the Rules made there under do not contemplate the Speaker i.e. the 2nd respondent, embarking upon an independent enquiry as to whether there has been a merger under para 4 but, the Speaker who acts under the Schedule-X only on a claim for disqualification under Paragraph No.2 of the X Schedule of the Constitution of India gets that jurisdiction to decide such issues as the qualified finality conferred by para 6(1) of the Xth was not available to the Order of the 2nd respondent and consequently declare that the 2st respondent is not competent to decide a merger of a political party independently without recourse to paragraph No.2 and Paragraph No.6(1) of the X Schedule of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.2 to decide the disqualification petitions pending as expeditiously as possible preferably within 90 days as decided in 2013 [11] SCC 794 and AIR [2013] SC 120, consequentially suspend the Bulletin no.5 dt.10.03.2016 issued by 1st respondent as illegal and without Constitutional sanction and to pass.....”

2. Heard Mr.Ravi Shankar Jandhyala, learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause of action in the present writ petition no longer survives for adjudication and, therefore, seeks dismissal of the writ petition as infructuous.

4. Recording the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

__________________

N.TUKARAMJI, J

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top