The cited writ petition seeking declaration and appointment by transfer regarding Assistant Executive Engineer post was dismissed as the petitioner withdrew the petition after respondents redressed their grievance.
The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn; the auxiliary MP was disposed of as infructuous.
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.32556 of 2010
Dated 1 5 th September, 2015
Between:
B.Ramesh Kumar
…Petitioner
And
The Andhra Pradesh State Irrigation Development Corporation (A State Government Undertaking), rep.by the Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Regd.Office:Road No.13, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad – 500 034 and others
Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Siva
Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2: Sri S.Harinath Reddy Counsel for respondent No.3: GP for Irrigation & CAD
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for the following substantive relief:
“…to issue a direction, order or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus a) declaring the action of respondents in rejecting the request of the petitioner for being appointed by transfer as Assistant Executive Engineer communicated vide Memo.No.IDC/MD/HRD/E10/355/91/ 2010/4718, dt. 01.02.2010 of the 2nd respondent as arbitrary, discriminatory, illegal, unjust and violative of article 14 of the Constitution of India; b) consequently direct the 1st Respondent Corporation to appoint the petitioner by transfer as Assistant Executive Engineer with effect from the last date of the examination of the Graduation in Engineering together with the consequential and attendant benefits like seniority, monetary benefits and such other benefits as he would be entitled to by virtue of the declaration and directions sought for herein.”
Sri Siva, learned counsel for the petitioner, has circulated a letter, dated 11.09.2015, wherein he has stated that the respondents have redressed the petitioner’s grievance and that therefore, the petitioner is seeking withdrawal of the writ petition. At the hearing, the learned counsel has reiterated the contents of the letter.
Hence, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.41391 of 2010 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
15th September, 2015 VGB
B.Ramesh Kumar
The Andhra Pradesh State Irrigation Development Corporation
C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
