Dismissed

V.T.Ranjan v. the General Manager S.C.Railway, Sec'Bad and 4 Others

Andhra Pradesh HC9 Jul 2024WP/3900/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, Amaravati, on 10.07.2024 terminated legal proceedings in an employment dispute, holding that the writ petition was rendered infructuous due to the efflux of time. The petition, which sought absorption into a suitable railway post, was closed without costs.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition and related miscellaneous petitions were closed without rent as to costs.

V.T.Ranjan Vs the General Manager S.C.Railway… — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

OO
c

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARl'^a 0> AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY /

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 3900 OF 2008

¶9

Between:

¶10

V.T.Ranjan, S/o. V.T.Venkateswarlu, Hindu, Aged about 52 years, R/o. -

¶11

D.No.2/16, Viswandharaopet, Near Saibaba Temple, BITRAGUNTA 524 142, Nellore District. A.P.

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

The General Manager South Central Railway, Rail Nilayam, SECUNDERABAD.

¶15

The Chief Medical Director, South Central Railway, Rail Nilayam, SECUNDERABAD.

¶16

The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, South Central Railway, VIJAYAWADA. (A.P. Krishna Dist.)

¶17

The Chief Medical Superintendent, South Central Railway, VIJAYAWADA (A.P), Krishna District.

¶18

Sri Y. Kondala Rao, S/o. Not known, Hindu, aged about 50 years, Occ: Welfare Inspector O/o. Sr.Divl. Personnel Officer,^SouthCentral Railway, VIJAYAWADA, Krishna Dist (A.P)

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

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 writ, or order or direction more particularly one in the

¶21

nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declare the action of the Respondents in denying to absorb of the Petitioner to the any suitable post in the scale of . Rs.2550-3200 Rs ( RP ) vide proceedings No.B/P.407/VA/ol.^VIIIdated10- ‘"v ■■ 6-2004 of S'"* Respondent which is based on No.MD/84/l/3A/ol.34 dated 20.i|S^004 of the 2"^^ Respondent and proceedings No.B/MD^{/Recruitsdated24-} 5-2004 of the 4*^ Respondent, even without subjecting the petitioner for Medical Test of B-ll, C-l & C-ll, which is confirmed by the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad, vide Judgement dated 20-7-2007 In O.A.No. 344/2005 as illegal, arbitrary^and violative of Article 14 & 16 of Constitution of India, consequents direct the 3^^^ Respondent to absorb the petitioner in any one of the suitable post with all consequential benefits , such as seniority, promotion including back wages,, I.A. NO: 1 OF 2008rWPMP.NO: 5093 OF 20081

¶22

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for absorption in any one in the suitable post by conducting^{ofMedicalTestin} B-ll, C-l and C-/II pending disposal of this writ petition.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri. J M NAIDU

¶24

Counsel for the Respondents: K M J D SYAMA SUNDARI (SC FOR CG) Counsel for the Respondents: Y V ANIL KUMAR (Central^Government Counsel)

¶25

The Court made the following Order:

APHC010167572008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶31

WEDNESDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶32

[3470]

¶33

PRESENT

¶34

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

¶35

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶36

WRIT PETITION NO: 3900/2008

Between:

V.t.ranjan

...PETITIONER

AND

The General Manager S C Railway Secbad 4 Others and ...RESPONDENT(S) Others

¶42

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶43

1.J M NAIDU

¶44

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶45

K M J D SYAMA SUNDARI (SC FOR CG)

¶46

Y V ANIL KUMAR (Central Government Counsel)

¶47

The Court made the following order: (perHon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari)

¶48

Sri J. M. Naidu, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by efflux of time the petition has been rendered infructuous and the same may be closed as such.

¶49

The Writ Petition is closed.

¶50

No order as to costs.

¶51

¶52

miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also As a sequel thereto

¶53

stand closed.

¶54

SDI- SHAIK MOHD. RAFI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

¶55

SECTION OFFICER

¶56

To,

¶57

One CC to Sri. J M NAIDU Advocate [OPUC]

¶58

One CC to Sri. K MJ D SYAMA SUNDARI (SC FOR CG)^Advocate

¶59

[OPUC]

¶60

One CC to Sri. Y V ANIL KUMAR (Central Government

¶61

Counsel) Advocate [OPUC]

¶62

Two CD Copies. LA

Writ NS Sec

HIGH COURT

{*, '

DATED: 10/07/2024

ORDER

WP.No.3900 of 2008

I,g 2 9 OCT 2029 m3;
y
'4-5- ^ Current Section

¶70

CLOSING THE WRITPETITION WITHOUT COSTS

V.T.Ranjan v. the General Manager S.C.Railway, Sec'Bad and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.T.Ranjan v. the General Manager S.C.Railway, Sec'Bad and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Y.Ram Mohan, Vijayawada Vs the Director General Sprots Authority of India, and 3 Others

The Sr. Post Master, Vijayawada, and 3 Others Vs Sri T. Srinivas, Vijayawada.

K. Kamakshi Vs the Senior Superintendent and 2 Others

P.Narayana, Prakasam District. Vs Railway Board, by Secy.New Delhi and 3 Others

Reliance General Insurance Limited Vs Ponga Geetha

G.Laxmi Devi,Anantapur District Vs the Generalmanager, Scr, Rail Nilayam, Secunderabad and 2 Othe