The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the 1994 recruitment procedure for Junior Line Men/Junior Plant Attendant posts as infructuous. The court found the selection process completed long before the petition was filed and no interim order protected the petitioners' interests.
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)
WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI
WRIT PETITION No. 11849 OF 1999
Between:
A.Ravinder and others
..... PETITIONERS
AND
A.P.Transco, rep. by its Secretary, Vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad and another
.....RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the Petitioner:
Counsel for the Respondents:
The Court made the following :
THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI
WRIT PETITION No. 11849 OF 1999
O R D E R :
This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the procedure followed by the respondents in filling up the posts of Junior Line Men/Junior Plant Attendant in the year 1994.
As could be seen from the material available on record, the selection process was completed in the year 1994 itself and there was no interim order protecting the interest of the petitioners during the pendency of this writ petition.
Hence, nothing survives for adjudication on merits at this point of time and accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
_____________ Date: 17.03.2010 G. ROHINI, J.
Ivd
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the selection process for Junior Line Men/Junior Plant Attendant posts filed in 1999 survives after the selection was completed in 1994 without interim protection
A.Ravinder and others
A.P.Transco
G.ROHINI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
