Dismissed

Kadimsetty Suryanarayana, v. The Secretary

Telangana HC2 Sept 2005WP/13006/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This brief order disposes of a writ petition seeking appointment in Group IV posts in A.P. The court identifies that the issue for some petitioners is covered by a previous Division Bench decision, while the petition from the rest is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach the tribunal.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of in terms of a previous Division Bench judgment for some petitioners; for the rest, it is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach the tribunal.

Kadimsetty Suryanarayana, Vs The Secretary — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2005)

¶1

HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENAKUMARI

¶2

¶3

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.LAKSHMANA REDDY.

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO:13006 OF 2005

¶5

Dated:2^nd September, 2005.

¶6

BETWEEN

¶7

1.Kadimisetty Suranarayana, s/o late Jagannadharao, aged 40 years, Hindu, Resident of 10-20-5/1, Ring Road, Anakapalle, Visakhapatnam Dist. & others.

¶8

….Petitioners.

¶9

And

¶10

1.The Secretary, A.P. P.S.C. Gruha kalpa, Nampally, Hyderabad & another.

¶11

…Respondents.

¶12

ORDER: (Per the Honourable Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari)

¶13

This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking a direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioners who have received call letters dated 27.3.1992 pursuant to the notification No:1 of 1989, dated 7.1.1989, issued for filling up the posts to Group IV in the State of A.P.

¶14

When this writ petition is taken up for hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that in so far as the petitioners-1, 3 to 7, 16 and 17 are concerned, the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by a Division Bench Judgment of this Court in W.P.No:6746 of 2005 and batch, dated 28.4.2005. While submitting that the case of the rest of the petitioners is not covered by the above judgment, the learned counsel for the rest of the petitioners seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the writ petition with a liberty to approach the tribunal by granting leave of this Court.

¶15

Recording the above statement, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in W.P.No:6746 of 2005 and batch, dated 28.4.2005 in so far as writ petitioners-1, 3 to 7, 16 and 17 are concerned. However, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn in so far as the rest of the petitioners are concerned with a liberty to approach the tribunal, for which leave is granted by this Court.

¶16

(T.MEENAKUMARI, J)

¶17

DATED: 2^ND SEPTEMBER, 2005

¶18

(P.LAKSHMANA REDDY, J)

¶19

GURC/DVS

¶20

HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI

¶21

¶22

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.LAKSHMANA REDDY.

¶23

WRIT PETITION NO:13006 OF 2005

¶24

(JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY THE HONOURABLE

¶25

SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENAKUMARI)

¶26

2^ND SEPTEMEBR, 2005.

Kadimsetty Suryanarayana, v. The Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kadimsetty Suryanarayana, v. The Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Government of a.P., Vs Sri D.Ramadasu

Smt. c. Mumtaz Begum, Vs D. Chakrapani

Sisit Kumar Mishra Vs Union of india

S.Venkata Rao, Vs The Regional Deputy Director

S.Nageswara Rao, Vs The Govt of A.P

Meesala Muralidhar, Vs The government. of A.P.