Dismissed

Gaddam Venkata Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC17 Jul 2015WP/18714/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad dismissed a writ petition challenging two government orders regarding the selection of beneficiaries. Relying on a previous judgment striking down one of the challenged orders, the court held that the petition was barred.

What did the court decide?

No order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.

Gaddam Venkata Reddy Vs The State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶2

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.18714 of 2015

¶4

Betw	een:
Gad Aged Villa	dam Venkata Reddy S/o. Suryanarayana Reddy, about 40 years, Occu:Sarpanch, R/o.Santamaguluru ge and Mandal, Prakasam District and another
	AND	.. Petitioners
State Panc Hyd	of A.P., rep.by its Principal Secretary, hayat Raj Department, Secretariat, erabad and others.	.. Respondents
DAT	E OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED : 17.07.2015
SUB	MITTED FOR APPROVAL:
	THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
1.	Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may : Yes / No Be allowed to see the Judgments ? :
2.	Whether the copies of judgment may be marked: Yes / No to Law Reporters/Journals :
3.	Whether Their Lordship wish to see the fair : Yes / No Copy of the Judgment ? :

¶5

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.18714 of 2015

¶7

ORDER:

¶8

This writ petition is filed praying for grant of following reliefs:

¶9

To issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondents in not acting at the time of selection of beneficiaries as per G.O.Ms.No.135 dated 17.09.2014 issued by Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department and G.O.Ms.No.6 dated 06.04.2015 issued by Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies (CS-2) Department as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice.

¶10

2. When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned standing counsel for Panchayat Raj submits that subject matter of the writ petition is covered by the decision of this Court dated 23.06.2015 in W.P.No.40667 of 2014 and batch. The very same G.O.Ms.No.135 Panchayat Raj & Rural Development (R.D.1) Department dated 17.09.2014 was under challenge in the said batch of writ petitions. This Court upheld the power of Government in issuing orders in G.O.Ms.No.135 dated 17.09.2014 and dismissed the batch of writ petitions.

¶11

3. Having regard to the judgment rendered by this Court concerning the same subject matter, this writ petition is also dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions if any pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.

¶12

JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶13

Date : 17.07.2015 kkm

¶14

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶15

WRIT PETITION No.18714 of 2015

¶16

Date: 17.07.2015

¶17

Kkm

Gaddam Venkata Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gaddam Venkata Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B. Narsimha, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Shankar Singh, Vs The Manager

Dangeti Surya Narayana Murthy, Vs Gollaprolu Nagar Panchayat

Konduboina Srinivasulu Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Mutturu Bhasker Reddy Vs The State of A.P.

Alluri Narayana, S/o. Ashirvadam, Aged 50 years, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh