Wp/17085/2008 Of N.pandu Rangam v. The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUSTTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 17085 of 2008 Between: N.Pandu Rangam S/o.Late Venkaiah Praja Aalochana News Paper 5-43, Opp: Agricultural Market Yard, Miryalguda, Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.2 The Joint Director of Income Tax (Investigation) O/o Director General of IncomeTax (Investigation) 9th floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. 3 The Addl. Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Head Quarters, O/o DirectorGeneral of Income Tax (Investigation) 9th floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh,Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased toissue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writof mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the rewardamount of Rs.15,00,000/- to the petitioner in the case of Sri R.Koteswara Rao, FilmFinanciers/Producers, Secunderabad, though 19 years have been passed, asillegal, arbitrary, unjust and violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of Indiaand consequently direct the respondents to pay the remaining rewarded amount ofRs.15,00,000/- to the petitioner, and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.VENUGOPALA RAO PASNOORU Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.S.R.ASHOK & V.R.BADRI (SC FORINCOME TAX) The Court made the following : HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 17085 of 2008 ORDER: ( Per the Honourable Smt.Justice T.Meenakumari) When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri Mohd.Amzad Ali representing SriVenugopal Rao Pasnooru, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, seekspermission of this Court to withdraw the writ petition. Permission is accorded. Accordingly, the Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty tofile a fresh writ petition as and when the cause of action arises. _______________________ Justice T.Meenakumari ____________________________ Justice Ramesh Ranganatham HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI& HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 17085 of 2008 (ORDER of the Division Bench delivered by the Honourable Smt.JusticeT.Meenakumari) 6 August, 2008