Disposed

Kanala Sreevardhan Rao v. Union of India

Andhra Pradesh HC21 Feb 2023WP/3276/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 seeking continuation of petitioner as counsellor. Petitioner restricted relief to consideration of representation dated 19.06.2022. Court disposed of petition by directing respondents to consider the representation and pass orders within four weeks, without examining merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider petitioner's representation dated 19.06.2022 and pass appropriate orders within four weeks.

Kanala Sreevardhan Rao Vs Union of India — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION No. 3276 of 2023

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This writ petition is filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following reliefs:

¶4

“...to issue an appropriate writ, order of direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing termination order dated 10.06.2022 and in not considering the petitioner’s representation dated 19.06.2022 and in not continuing the petitioner as counsellor (male) in the respondent organisation as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to its own guidelines, violation of the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as a counsellor (male) for a further period as per the terms and conditions in clause f (1)of notification-2019 in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” (in verbatim)

¶5

After arguing the matter for some time, learned counsel for

¶6

the petitioner restricted the main relief of the writ petition to that of consideration of the representation of the petitioner dated 19.06.2022 by the respondents. The learned standing counsel for

¶7

¶8

NV,J W.P.No.3276 of 2023

¶9

the respondents has expressed no objection to consider the representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law.

¶10

In view of the above, without going into the merits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 19.06.2022 and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs.

¶11

As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

¶12

____________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J

¶13

21^st February, 2023 cbs

¶14

¶15

NV,J W.P.No.3276 of 2023

¶16

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶17

Writ Petition No. 3276 of 2023

¶18

21^st February, 2023

¶19

cbs

Kanala Sreevardhan Rao v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanala Sreevardhan Rao v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K Guruswamy, Vs The Assistant General Manager

Karri Shyamala Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Koyya Venkata Rakesh Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Venkata Narasimha Rao Makana Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Sangameswara High School Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Sk. Jameeulla, Vs The State of A.P.