Writ petition challenged the withholding of results for Animal Husbandry Assistant posts. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the cause of action no longer survived. The Court accepted this submission and dismissed the petition as infructuous.
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.
s 5 W if
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAV
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF MOVE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 1673 OF 2021
Between:
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
...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 a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in keeping the results of petitioners with held, not allowing thepetitionersto participate in the selection process for the posts of Animal Husbandry Assistants though petitioners are fully qualified and eligible as per the amendment made in GO Ms.No.2, Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries (AH.II) Department, dated 10.01.2020 on par with others as arbitrary, illegal and against the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of Constitution of India.
lA NO: 1 OF 2021
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to allow the petitioners to participate in the selection process for the posts of Animal Husbandry Assistants as per the amendment made in GO Ms.No.2 Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development & Fisheries (AH.II) Department, dated 10.01.2020 on par with others forthwith, pending disposaloftheabovewrit petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI GUNDRATI RAMAN GOUD Counsel for the Respondents No.1,3,4; GP FOR ANIMALHUSBANDARY Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ
The Court made the following: ORDER
APHC010023372021
/
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH 050 AT AMARAVATI 0S?5 (Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3310]
THURSDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 1673/2021
Between:
Pujari Balachandar and Others
...PETITIONER{S)
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1.GUNDRATI RAMAN GOUD
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR ANIMAL HUSBANDARY
The Court made the following:
ORDER
Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr V.Ramesh learned counsel representing on behalf of Mr Gundrati Raman Goud, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and it has become infructuous.
- Recording the above submission, the Writ Petition isdismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications,
if any pending, shall stands
closed.
Sd/-SHAIK MOHD RAF! ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To
nm
HIGH COURT
DATED:14/11/2024
ORDER
WP.No.1673 of 2021
DISMISING THE WP AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition survives or has become infructuous?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Pujari Balachandar
Gollori Uday
Vanje Anil Kumar
The State of Andhra Pradesh
The District Collector, Visakhapatnam District
The Director, Animal Husbandry Department
Dr Justice K Manmadha Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
