IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA,THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR
Kotha Haribabu – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
WA 1219/2025
THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No.1219 OF 2025 Mr. B. Mayur Reddy, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. Rohit Pogula, learned counsel for the appellant.
The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondents.
JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya)
1. The appellant herein filed W.P.No.33218 of 2025 challenging the Memo No.23019/LM&FF/A2/2025 dated 26.08.2025 issued by the respondent No.2 and the consequential proceeding No.E2/20-
48/2025 dated 09.09.2025 issued by the respondent No.4.
2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant/writ petitioner submits that the appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 03.11.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge by not granting interim protection to the appellant.
3. The impugned order is not part of the Writ Appeal and has been produced before us in Court today.
4. We note from the impugned order dated 03.11.2025 that what all the learned Single Judge did was while issuing notice to the respondents, the learned Single Judge granted time to the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue to obtain instructions or file a counter by the next date of hearing. The matter was adjourned to 01.12.2025.
5. It is relevant that the impugned order does not reflect any disinclination on the part of the learned Single Judge to grant protection to the appellant/writ petitioner.
6. We are informed that the appellant/writ petitioner attempted to mention the matter before the learned Single Judge on 04.11.2025 for urgent listing. We are also informed that the respondents are taking steps that may prejudice the appellant.
7. We are not inclined to entertain the Writ Appeal since the order dated 03.11.2025, if it can be called at all, is innocuous and does not reflect any prejudice to the appellant. If the appellant is indeed affected by the actions of the respondents, the remedy lies before the learned Single Judge. Needless to say, the appellant is at liberty to take steps for urgent listing of the matter.
8. W.A.No.1219 of 2025, along with all connected applications, is accordingly is disposed of in terms of the above. There shall be no order as to costs.
MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, J GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, J Date: 06.11.2025 va
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.