The Division Bench dismissed the writ appeal, holding that the appellant had alternative remedies available against the final disciplinary order of removal dated 21-7-2010 and the appeal had no merit for such recourse.
Writ appeal dismissed. Appellant left to pursue alternative remedies against the final order.
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 OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AT HYDERABAD
Monday, this the 22nd day of November, 2010
Writ Appeal No.796 of 2010
Between
K.Krishna
… Appellant/Writ Petitioner
and
The Managing Director cum Vice Chairman, APSRTC, Hyderabad and 2 others
… Respondents/Respondents
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO
Writ Appeal No.796 of 2010
Judgment: (per Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice B.Prakash Rao)
Heard Sri J.K.Ranjit Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri K.Madhava Reddy, learned standing counsel for the respondents.
2. At request, the main appeal itself is being taken up for hearing and disposed of at the admission stage.
3. The appellant is the unsuccessful writ petitioner, who appears to be working as a driver in the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation at the relevant point of time. Admittedly, subsequent to the initiation of the disciplinary proceedings on the appellant, a final order was passed on 21-7-2010.
4. The grievance of the appellant/writ petitioner in these proceedings is that he has made several representations with the respondents including on 18-4-2010 for supply of certain documents.
5. The learned single Judge has observed the factum of passing of
a final order on 21-7-2010 against the appellant and necessarily he requires to pursue the remedies available against such final proceedings by pursuing the representations filed earlier. All these aspects can constitute a valid ground to be raised by the appellant and such remedies, which can be availed of by the appellant and appropriate orders can be passed.
6. Hence, leaving open to the appellant/writ petitioner to raise such grounds, which can be considered on merits, we do not find any merit in the writ appeal, especially when the appellant has alternative remedies against the final orders of removal on 21-7-2010.
7. The writ appeal is accordingly dismissed.
________________________________ HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO
________________________________ JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO
22nd November, 2010. Ak
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO
Writ Appeal No.796 of 2010 (Judgment of the Division Bench delivered by Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice B.Prakash Rao)
22nd November, 2010.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ appeal should be allowed considering the existence of alternative remedies against the final removal order.
Whether the appellant is barred from pursuing further remedies after a final disciplinary order was passed.
What is the appropriate disposition of the writ appeal in light of the appellant's procedural bar.
K.Krishna
The Managing Director cum Vice Chairman, APSRTC, Hyderabad
2 others
B.PRAKASH RAO
V.SURI APPA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
