Petitioner filed a writ petition challenging salary payment orders under the A.P. Schools services Rules 1982. The court noted the counsel submitted the cause was infructuous and dismissed the petition accordingly.
The Writ Petition was dismissed as infructuous 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION NO: 14975 OF ?niR
Between:
Siddiqui Aided Schools Committee Sirivel, Rep by its President Sri KJ Saheb Basha Siddiqui. Nandyala. Kurnool district. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of A. P. rep by its Secretary School Education, Dept. Secretariat, Hyderabad.
...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 pass orders particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus ^ respondent in Proc. Re. No. 1746/B9/2015 01.1 j.1.^016 and the consequential Lr.No. 260/B9/2015 dt 19 2 2016 as the A.P. Recognised Private Aided Schools services f to teachers ) Rules. 1982 and violative of the Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside ^ H submitted as per the procedure dt 1 4?98^2 G.O.Ms.No.365 Edn (T-1)
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2016IWPMP. NO: 18601 OF 2niR)
in th. H that in the circumstances stated n in support of the writ petition, the High Court maybepleased following the G.O.Ms.No.62 Edn tor payment of salaries and consequently direct to pass the bills in terms of 1982 Rules pending disposal of the above writ petition
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SASIDHAR representing SRI KASA JAGANMOHAN REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR EDUCATION
The Court made the following: ORDER
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION No.l4975 of 2016
ORDER:
The present Writ Petition came to be filed under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the
following relief
“...to pass orders particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the orders of the respondent in Proc.RC.No.l746/B9/2015 dt 13.01.2016 and the consequential Lr.No.260/B9/2015 dated 19.02.2016 as arbitrary, illegal, ultravires the A.P. Recognised Private Aided Schools services (payment of salaries and allowances to teachers) Rules, 1982 and violative of the Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and direct to allow the pay bills submitted as per the procedure prescribed under 1982 Rules framed under G.O.Ms.No.365 Edn. (T-1) dated 01.04.1982 and pass...”
- Today when the matter came up for hearing, Mr.Sasidhar, learned counsel representing Mr. Kasa Jaganmohan Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for further adjudication and the matter has become infructuous.
- Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition ISi: dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
Sd/- G.HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// (Section officer
To,
ssb gl
/ ■'*
HIGH COURT
DATED:19/12/2023
ORDER
WP.No.14975 of 2016
DISMISSING THE W.P. AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Writ Petition survives for further adjudication after the petitioner's submission.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Siddiqui Aided Schools Committee Sirivel
The State of A.P.
District Educational Officer
Dy. Educational Officer
V. Sujuatha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
