Summary not satisfiable; order is a one-line direction to a respondent to furnish material without citing legal propositions.
Direction to respondent No.2 to provide material required by the petitioner subject to relevance.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.5028 OF 2010
Dated 1 2 th March, 2010
Between:
M.Mohan Krishna …Petitioner And Secunderabad Cantonment Board And another …Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner : Sri V.V.N.Narayana Rao Counsel for the respondents: Sri Y.V.Ravi Prasad S.C. for the respondents
The Court made the following
ORDER:
Though the petitioner filed this writ petition for a larger relief, Sri V.V.N.Narayana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted, at the hearing, that his client will be satisfied if respondent No.2 is directed to furnish the material required by the petitioner in connection with the show cause notice issued by him.
Having regard to this fair request of the learned counsel, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.2 to provide the material required by the petitioner subject to its relevance to the dispute.
As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP No.5028 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
Dated 12th March, 2010
vrn
M. Mohan Krishna
Secunderabad Cantonment Board
Another
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
