Writ petition by six employees of a co-operative town bank challenging directions to remove them from service was dismissed as infructuous after counsel stated the cause no longer survives for adjudication.
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.
/•
M THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 28278 OF 2015
Eletween:
...PETITIONERS
AMD
...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 Writ of Mandamus declaring the action on the part of the 4th
respondent in directing the 3rd respondent bank vide Procdgs.No. 1233/2014-C2, dated 01.12.2014 to remove the petitioners from servige and consequential orders of removal passed by the 3rd respondent on 24.06.2015 asi illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory being violative of Arts. 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to continue the petitioners.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMF^ NO: 3(5660 OF 2015)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the Proceedings of the 4th respondent vide Procdgs. No. 1233/2014-C2, dated 01.12.2014 and consequentialordersofremoval passed by the 3rd respondent on 24.06.2015 pending disposal of the writ petition,
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. I K ANNAPURNA
Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR COOPERATION Counsel for the Respondent; V SUDHAKAR REDDY The Court made the following : ORDEFt
APHC010220132015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
[3333]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY .THE SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION NO: 28278/2015
Between;
V.jagadish, and Others
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others
...RESPONDENT{S)
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1.1 K ANNAPURNA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR COOPERATION (AP)
2.VSUDHAKAR REDDY
The Court made the following:
?■
ORDER:
, Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, Smt.l.K.Annapurna learned counsel for the petitioners appeared through virtual hearing and informed this Court that the cause in the Writ Petitiondoesnotsurvivefor further adjudication and the matter has become infructuous.
as infructuous. 2. Recording the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this WritPetitionshallstand closed.
//TRUE COPY//
Sd/-SHAIK MOHD. RAFI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SEcfe)N OFFICER
To, 1 Pne CC to SRI I K ANNAPURNA Advocate [OPUC] ^ ^ FOR COOPERATION, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. 2 Two CCs to GP [OUT] 3. OneCCto S;Rl V SUDHAK;^R REDDY Advocate [OPUC] 4. Three CD Copies
KM
HIGH COURT
DATED: 02/08/2024
ORDER
WP.No.28278 of 2015
DISMISSING THE WP AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
V. Jagadish and Others
The State of Andhra Pradesh
The Commissioner for Co-operation & Registrar of Co-operative Societies
The Srikalahasti Co.Op. Town Bank Ltd.
The Divisional Co.operative Officer / Dy. Registrar of Co.operative Societies, Tirupathi
V.Sujatha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
