JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)July 1, 1994

T-304 de 1994

The official text of this ruling is in Spanish and is shown as published by the Colombian authorities.

Reporting justice Jorge Arango Mejía

✓Claimant Arnulfo Camacho Medina

✓
Topic · hard data
Der. De Peticion. Silencio Administrativo. Demora Del Inderena En Resolver Un Recurso. Concedida.
01

Topics and subtopics of the ruling

✓What the ruling decides and analyzes, as indexed by the Court's case-law reporter's office. Each topic links to every decision that addresses it.

4 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
02

What it decided

This decision records no constitutional review holdings. This is common in tutela rulings and orders, where the decision does not concern a legal provision.
·

Operative part (Resuelve)

✓Verbatim text of the decision, as it appears in the ruling. It complements the structured holdings above.

See the operative part (3 points)
  1. PRIMERO. CONFIRMANSE, por las razones expuestas, la sentencia de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, Sala de Casación Civil, del veintiuno (21) de enero de mil novecientos noventa y cuatro (1994), que CONFIRMO el fallo proferido por el Tribunal Superior del Distrito Judicial de Cundinamarca, Sala Agraria, que tuteló el derecho de petición del señor Arnulfo Camacho Medina.
  2. SEGUNDO. ADICIONANSE los fallos de primera y segunda instancia, en el sentido de ORDENAR al Instituto Nacional de Recursos Naturales y Renovables y del Ambiente, INDERENA, Regional Cundinamarca, que un plazo no mayor de dos (2) meses, resuelva la solicitud de prórroga de la concesión de aguas de la fuente conocida con el nombre de "Guayabal", ubicada en la vereda Peladeros del Municipio de Guaduas, y concedida al señor Arnulfo Camacho Medina, a través de la resolución No. 531 de 1987. Resolución que podrá ser en cualquier sentido.
  3. TERCERO. COMUNIQUESE por Secretaría General, la presente sentencia al Tribunal Superior del Distrito Judicial de Cundinamarca, Sala Agraria, para los efectos establecidos en el artículo 36 del decreto 2591 de 1991.
Verbatim text · source: operative part of the ruling
03

The bench that decided

We distinguish who appears in the ruling (signature, vote or concurrence) from who probably sat on the Court on that date. The difference is shown by color and shape.

04

How it connects

Each decision is a node in the case-law network: it cites some and is cited by others. Follow the threads.

The document’s networkthe most influential links · node size is how often the Court cites it
constitutional review unification tutela

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.