A 2009 writ petition challenging a Central Administrative Tribunal order on pay fixation was dismissed for want of prosecution as the petitioner made no representation when the case was listed.
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)
THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 18112 OF 2009
Between:
P.B. KAMESHWARA RAO, S/o. Late Sri P. Venkateshwar Rao, Retired Employee R/o. Flat No. 402, Satyam Enclave, Sivaji Park Road, Laxminagar, Visakhapatnam-530017.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a direction, order or writ more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF "CERTIORARI" a. Callingforalltherelevant records relating to and connected with the order in Original Application No. 51 of 2005, dt: 21-08-2008 on the file of the learned Central administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad and set aside the same as being unsustainable; b. Also declare the action of the respondents in not fixing
p-
H
the pay of the petitioner at Rs. 5900/- stage above, in the scale of 50008000 in accordance with point No. 17 of the clarification issued by the Department of Personnel and Training in its officeMemorandumdated : 10-02-2000 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and violativeofArticles14and16of the Constitution of India; c. Consequently direct the respondents to refix the pay of the petitioner at Rs. 5900/- stage above, in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000 in accordance with condition No. 17 of the office Memorandum dated 10-02-2000 and further direct the respondents to compute and release all the benefits that would flow out of the declaration and direction prayed for supra;
I.A. NO:
1 OF 2009(WPMP. NO: 23726 OF 2009)
Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to fix an early date for final hearing of this writ petition
Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI. SIVA
Counsel for the Respondent: SRI C YADAGIRI
Counsel for the Respondents: DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OFINDIA The Court made the following ORDER:
[3470]
APHC010083202009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY .THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
i
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION NO: 18112/2009
Between:
P.b. Kameshwara Rao, Visakhpatnam,
...PETITIONER
AND
The Engineerinchief And 3 Others and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.S1VA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.C YADAGIRI
2.DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA
The Court made the following:
ORDER: (per Ravi Nath Tilhari, J)
No representation for the petitioner.
- The matter pertains to the year 2009 and has been listedunderthe caption ‘specially identified cases’.
J
prosecution”.
No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also
stand closed.
Sd/- B. CHITTI JOSEPH
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To
PRK
t
HIGH COURT
DATED:18/07/2024
ORDER
WP.No.18112of2009
o<br>g 2 8 JAN 2025
^ . Current Secuon
DISMISSING THE WP FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION,
WITHOUT COSTS
P.B. Kameshwara Rao
The Engineer in Chief, Br. CSCC, Ministry of Defence
The Engineer-in-Chief, Head Quarters, Southern Command, Pune
The Director General, Naval Project, Naval Base Port, Visakhapatnam
Garrison Engineer (P) No.1, Office of Chief Engineer, Naval Complex, Visakhapatnam
Ravi Nath Tilhari
Nyapathy Vijay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
