The High Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous at the hearing stage after the petitioner's counsel submitted that the cause of action no longer survived.
None. The writ petition was dismissed without costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
J
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AW TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION NO: 10149 OF 2015
Between:
M.Vijay Kumar. S/o Venkateshwara Rao, 50 years, E.353229, Driver, D.No.779,Rangu Bazar, Jaggaiahpeta, Krishna District.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport, Corporation, Rep., by its Managing Director, Bus Bhavan, Mushirabad, Hyderabad-500624
2. The Regional Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Krishna Region, Vijayawada, Krishna District. '
3. The Depot Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Jaggaiahpet Depot. Krishna District.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the 3"* Respondent in insisting the petitioner to perform dual job of Driver and Conductor on Ticket Issuing Machine (TIM) service is arbitrary, unjust, contrary to the provisions of M.V.Act,1988 and A.P.M.V Rules 1989 and contrary to the orders of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No 29625/2011 dated 30.01.2012 as confirmed in Writ Appeal No.954/2012 dated 01.12.2014, discriminatory and in violation of Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to permit the petitioner to discharge his duties as Driver without insisting on performing dual duty of Driver and Conductor on Ticket Issuing Machine (TIM) service.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP. NO: 13372 OF 2015)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant an interim direction to the Respondents to allow the petitioner to perform duties of Driver with Conductor in the 3'^'^ Respondent Depot, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. A G SATYANARAYANA RAO Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3: SRI P DURGA PRASAD, SC FOR APSRTC The Court made the following: ORDER
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION No. 10149 of 2015
ORDER:
Sri.A.G.Satyanarayana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in this writ petition does not survive as such the matter has become infructuous.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ^
Petition shaU stand closed.
Sd/- M. PADMALATHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To, 1. One CC to Sri. A G Satyanarayana Rao Advocate (OPUC] 2. One CC to Sri. P Durga Prasad, SC for APSRTC Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CD Copies Sdkr
HIGH COURT
DATED;10/03/2023
ORDER
WP.No.10149 of 2015
DISMISSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition survives given the submissions that the matter has become infructuous.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M. Vijay Kumar
Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation
The Regional Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation
The Depot Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation
V. Sujatha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
