The High Court dismissed a writ appeal as infructuous, finding that the grounds were no longer maintainable. The appeal was disposed of without costs.
Writ appeal dismissed as infructuous. No 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 JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL NO : 60 of 2002
(Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 19.9.2001 in WP NO : 14648 OF 1992 on the file of the High Court.)
Between:
The Divisional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Srikakulam.
..... APPELLANT
AND
.....RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the Appellant:MR.K.HARINATH
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2: GP FOR TRANSPORT
Counsel for the Respondent No.3: Mr. T. Venkata Ramana
The Court made the following :
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL NO : 60 of 2002
ORAL JUDGMENT:
Learned Standing Counsel for the appellant-Corporation submits that the writ appeal has become infructuous.
Recording the submission of the learned counsel, the writ appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous. No costs.
___________________ T.MEENA KUMARI,J
Date: 17th June, 2009
_________________ SANJAY KUMAR,J
pnb
The Divisional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Srikakulam
1 State Transport Appellate Tribunal
2 The Regional Transport Authority
3 K.Rama Rao, Private Operator, Srikakulam
T.MEENA KUMARI
SANJAY KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
