Dismissed

D. Srinivasulu, v. Government of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC14 Oct 2016WP/37668/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging the non-appointment of the petitioner as a Fair Price Shop Dealer, the Acting Chief Justice dismissed the petition because the petitioner failed to implead the successful candidate despite unresolved marks in the sole basis for disqualification.

What did the court decide?

The relief sought in the Writ Petition to declare the action of the respondents illegal and arbitrary is dismissed.

D. Srinivasulu, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN

¶2

Writ Petition No.37668 of 2013

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

Neither is the learned counsel for the petitioner present nor is there any representation on his behalf.

¶5

The relief sought for in this Writ Petition is to declare the action of the respondents in not appointing the petitioner as Fair Price Shop Dealer for Shop No.111 of Muthyalareddy Palli, Tirupati Urban Mandal, and proceeding to appoint less meritorious person due to pressure of the ruling political party, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶6

Learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies would submit that Smt.G.Revathi secured higher marks in the written test and in the interview; she secured 47½ marks out of 50 in the written test and 20 marks out of 50 in the interview; the petitioner had secured 47½ marks out of 50 in the written test and 10 marks out of 50 in the interview; and, hence, Smt.G.Revathi was selected as the Fair Price Shop Dealer vide proceedings dated 16.12.2013.

¶7

Though the present Writ Petition was filed only thereafter on 20.12.2013, the petitioner has chosen not to array Smt. G. Revathi, the successful candidate, as a respondent eo-nominee in the Writ Petition. It would be wholly inappropriate for this Court, therefore, to adjudicate on the petitioner’s claim of having been denied appointment for extraneous reasons without hearing the successful candidate in this regard. In any event,

¶8

¶9

the material placed before this Court, by the Learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, shows that Smt.G.Revathi secured more marks than the petitioner and was, therefore, appointed as a Fair Price Shop Dealer. I see no reason, therefore, to grant the petitioner the relief sought for in the Writ Petition.

¶10

The Writ Petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶11

_________________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, ACJ. Date:14.10.2016. cs

D. Srinivasulu, v. Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D. Srinivasulu, v. Government of Andhra Pradesh

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

S.Palakonda Rayudu Vs The District Collector, Cuddapah District.

M/s Vandana Maching Centre, Vs Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

Medlacheruvu Uma Rani, W/o. D.Rama Subbaiah, Vs The Child Development Project Officer, Vinjamur Mandal

Nazma Begum Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

The Depot Manager, Apsrtc, Cantonment Bus Depot, Vs V.R. Indira Rama Devi W/o.Chennakesavulu

M/s. Siva Sankar Dal Mill, Vs The Central Power Distribunal Company of A.P. Limited