Dismissed

Jeedi Dasthagiraiah , Medari Dastagiraiah, v. Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal

Telangana HC21 Mar 2014WP/1681/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petitioner challenged an Administrative Tribunal order dismissing his application for promotion by holding no lis remained. The High Court assessed the counter-affidavit and dismissed the writ petition, refusing to quash the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed. Liberty is granted to challenge the proceedings of respondent No.4.

Jeedi Dasthagiraiah , Medari Dastagiraiah, Vs… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU AND

¶2

THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS

¶3

WRIT PETITION No.1681 OF 2014

¶4

ORDER:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.C.Bhanu)

¶5

This writ petition is filed seeking to issue writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order, dated 1.2.2013, in O.A.No.7801 of 2010 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short, “the Tribunal”) and set aside the same, and consequently, quash the proceedings, dated 14.12.2010 of respondent No.4.

¶6

2. Petitioner herein/applicant filed the aforementioned Original Application before the Tribunal to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 to 6 herein/respondents in not considering his representations, dated 20.2.2009 and 20.1.2010, requesting to consider his case for promotion to the post of Sub-Registrar as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently, direct them to consider his case for promotion to the said post.

¶7

3. The Tribunal, upon considering the material on record, disposed of the Original Application holding that in view of the fact that the applicant’s main prayer as well as the interim prayer are one and the same and in view of the fact that the proceedings, dated 18.12.2010 and 14.12.2010, were issued rejecting the representation of the applicant, no lis remains for adjudication. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed by the applicant.

¶8

4. Respondent No.3 herein filed counter-affidavit before the Tribunal stating that the representation, dated 20.1.2010, of the petitioner was rejected. Therefore, the Tribunal rightly disposed of the

¶9

Original Application as no lis remains for adjudication. Hence, we do not find any reasons to admit the writ petition.

¶10

5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to challenge the proceedings, dated 14.12.2010, of respondent No.4 herein, if he is so advised. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶11

______________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU

¶12

_______________ JUSTICE ANIS

¶13

Date: 21.03.2014 AMD

¶14

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU AND

¶15

THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS

¶16

WRIT PETITION No.1681 OF 2014

¶17

DATE: 21.03.2014

¶18

AMD

Jeedi Dasthagiraiah , Medari Dastagiraiah, v. Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeedi Dasthagiraiah , Medari Dastagiraiah, v. Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union of India Vs E.Krishna Rao

The General Manager, Vs Shaik Gaffar

Programme Staff Association of Air and Doordarshan Vs E.Kriashna Rao

T. Narasimha Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

G. Soundarya, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

The Union of India, Vs B.N.Singh S/o. Brahmadeo Singh