A writ petition challenging the non-issuance of a call letter for a Junior Linemen interview was dismissed as infructuous because the recruitment was on a yearly contract basis, causing the cause of action to lapse before adjudication.
Writ petition dismissed as infructuous; miscellaneous petitions, if any, closed; no order as to costs.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.10900 of 2007
ORDER :
The instant writ petition is filed seeking Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not issuing call letter to the petitioner to attend interview for the post of Junior Linemen along with others, as illegal and arbitrary.
__________________________________ JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA 17.09.2016. Msr
2
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA
WRIT PETITION No.10900 of 2007
17.09.2016 Msr
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition survives for adjudication given the yearly contract nature of the recruitment.
Whether the writ petition can be dismissed as infructuous due to lapse of cause.
Petitioner
Respondents
A. Shankar Narayana
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
