Petitioners sought age relaxation and preference over direct recruits for APSRTC Mechanics/Artisans posts. Counsel stated the cause did not survive; the court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, without costs.
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)
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 29500 OF 2010
Between:
...PETITI(iNER(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 an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the
respondents herein to accord necessary age relaxation to the petitioners and preference over direct recruits in appointment to the post of Mechanics / Artisans notified in Vartha News paper dated 12.11.2010.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2010(WPMP. NO: 37590 OF 2010)
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 grant an interim orders to the Respondents to permit the petitioners in the selections to the post of Mechanics / Artisans pending disposal of the writ petition
Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI. A G SATYANARAYANA RAO
Counsel for the Respondents: N SRIHARI ( SC FOR APSRTC K
The Court made the following: ORDER
APHC010156262010
\
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3457]
FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 29500/2010
Between:
R. Siva Rama Rao, Kurnool ( Dist), & Ano and Others
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
A P S R T C Rep By M D Hyd 2 Othrs and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit thatthecauseinthe Writ Petition does not survive any further. Hence,thematterhasbecome infructuous.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous.Thereshall be no order as to costs.
2
r
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed
//TRUE COPY//
SDI- M.PRABHAKARA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
SECTfON OFFICER
To,
VSN
r
VSN
HIGH COURT HN,J
DATED:23/08/2024
ORDER
WP.No.29500 of 2010
DISMISSING THE WP AS INFRUCTUOUS
WITHOUT COSTS
1 provisions across 1 enactments
R. Siva Rama Rao
D. Balakrista Reddy
A.P.S.R.T.C., rep. by its Managing Director
The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Kurnool Region
The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Ananthapur Region
Harinath.N
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
