Writ petition challenging the inaction regarding reservation roster maintenance was dismissed as infructuous on the representation that the cause does not survive for adjudication on merits.
No order as to 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 (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI
WRIT PETITION No. 7532 of 2007
Between:
1 Raghuram Kondala, S/o.K. Prakasa Rao, R/o. Flat No.302, 242/3Rt, NaseamManzil, Vijayanagar Colony, Hyd.
2 B.Y. Pravin KUmar, S/o.B. Yadagiri, H.no. 8-183, Laxminagar Colony, Karmanghat, Hyderabad. 3 Madhu Kurapati, S/o.K. Sudershan, H.No.11-22-74, Kasibugga, Warangal.
..... PETITIONER(S)
AND
1 Dr. N.T.R.University of health Sciences, Vijayawada-520 008, A.P., rep.by its Registrar. 2 The Government of A.P., rep. by its Prl., Secretary, Health, Medical and Family Welfare Dept., A.P., Secretarit, Hyd.
.....RESPONDENT(S)
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order direction or Writ Particualrly one in thenature of writ of mandmaus or any other appropirate writ (i) declaring the action of the respondents innot maintaining the roster for 15% unreaserved seats and sstatewide seat 4.4.2007 ( first phase ) as illegal and arbitrary and set aside the same (iii) by maintaining 100% point roster separately for (a) 15% unreaserved seats (b) statewide seats (c) OU Local area seats (d) Candidates to choose statewide seats or 15% unreaservedsests or seats meant for local candidates of the universitylocal arears and pass.
Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.VIDYASAGAR
Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH & FAMI.WELFARE
The Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE Ms.JUSTICE G.ROHINI
WRIT PETITION No.7532 of 2007
ORDER:
It is represented by Sri G.Vidyasagar, learned counsel for the petitioners, that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication on merits.
2. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
_____________________ JUSTICE G. ROHINI 04.06.2009. Msr/Ivd
THE HON’BLE Ms.JUSTICE G.ROHINI
WRIT PETITION No.7532 of 2007
04.06.2009 (Msr/Ivd)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition survives for adjudication on merits?
Raghuram Kondala, 2 B.Y. Pravin KUmar, 3 Madhu Kurapati
Dr. N.T.R.University of health Sciences, Vijayawada, 2 The Government of A.P.
G.ROHINI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
