Disposed

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its v. M.Venkateswara Prasad

Telangana HC28 Jul 2016WP/28449/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by the State assailing an Administrative Tribunal order. Following a prior judgment (W.P.No.12141 of 2010) on a similar issue, the Court directed the Tribunal to act expeditiously upon its order after providing a hearing to parties. The petition and a related miscellaneous matter were disposed of accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Directed that the order passed by the Tribunal shall be acted upon expeditiously after giving due opportunity of hearing.

The Government of Andhra Pradesh… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR AND

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SEETHARAMA MURTI

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.28449 of 2009

¶4

O R D E R: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Sanjay Kumar)

¶5

This writ petition is filed by the State assailing the order dated 18.12.2008 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in OA.no.1915 of 2008.

¶6

By order dated 18.01.2010, this Court granted interim suspension of the order under challenge.

¶7

By the common order dated 18.12.2008, the Tribunal allowed a batch of cases and remanded the matter for consideration afresh.

¶8

It is now stated by Sri K. Satyanarayana Murthy, learned counsel that a similar writ petition, W.P.No.12141 of 2010, arising out of OA.No.4314 of 2007 where similar directions were granted by the Tribunal was confirmed by this Court. A copy of the order dated 01.06.2010 passed by this Court in W.P.No.12141 of 2010 is placed on record.

¶9

WP.MP.no.29940 of 2016 was filed by the 1^st respondent to pass a similar order in this writ petition as was passed in W.P.No.12141 of 2010.

¶10

Learned Government Pleader for Services (AP) does not dispute that the issue that fell before this Court for consideration in WP.No.12141 of 2010 was similar to the case on hand.

¶11

That being so, we are inclined to follow the earlier order passed by this Court in WP.No.12141 of 2010, as the Tribunal did not even decide the issue finally, but only remitted the matter for consideration afresh.

¶12

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of directing that the order passed by the Tribunal shall be acted upon expeditiously after giving due opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned.

¶13

WP.MP.no.29940 of 2016 is accordingly ordered.

¶14

Pending Miscellaneous Petitions shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs.

¶15

_____________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶16

____________________________ JUSTICE M. SEETHARAMA MURTI

¶17

28.07.2016 Vjl

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its v. M.Venkateswara Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its v. M.Venkateswara Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vankdavath Kotemma Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. P.Sravanthi, Vs The State of Telangana

Smt P.Manjula Devi Vs The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Shaik Kolimi Noor Mohammed, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. v. Padmaja Vani, Vs K. Suresh

P. Pallam Raju, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh