The petitioner was not promoted due to age and superannuation. The writ petition was closed with no order as to costs and no substantive ruling on the promotion grievance.
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.
[3457]
APHC010207222011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 17406/2011
Between:
K.eswara Prasad, S/o Late K.v.srinivasa Rao,
...PETITIONER
AND
Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.JITHENDER RAO VEERAMALLA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
2.P SRI RAGHU RAM
The Court made the following:
the petitioner is that the respondents therein not including the post of “Personal
Secretary” in the promotion policy, dated 02.12.2010 issued by the respondents
and not considering the petitioner’s case for being promoted to the next level of higher cadre.
They submitted that the petitioner’s age was 59 years when the writ petition was
filed in the year, 2011. The petitioner has attained the superannuation long back.
________________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N
Date: 06.11.2024
RMD
243
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION No.17406 of 2011
Date: 06.11.2024
RMD
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to promotion when he had already attained superannuation before the writ petition was filed.
K.eswara Prasad
Dredging Corporation Of India Ltd and Others
HARINATH.N
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
