Writ petition was dismissed as infructuous because the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cause of action no longer survives.
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.
APHC010011532020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3310]
WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 836/2020
Between:
Shaik Salahuddin Sabir and Others
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
The Government Of A P and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1.KAVITHA GOTTIPATI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION (AP)
The Court made the following:
ORDER
Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr A.V.N.Yaswanth,
learned counsel representing on behalf of Smt Kavitha Gottipati, learned
counsel for the petitioners submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and it has become infructuous.
as infructuous. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stands
closed.
_________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.
Date: 20.11.2024 TM
THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO
W.P.No.836 of 2020
Date: 20.11.2024
TM
Shaik Salahuddin Sabir and Others
The Government Of A P and Others
K. Manmadha Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
