The High Court dismissed the petitioner's writ petition as infructuous after the respondents demonstrated that a related pending writ petition prevented any new LPG distributorship notification, rendering the current claim non-justiciable at that time.
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 U. DURGA PRASAD RAO
Writ Petition No.12840 of 2011
ORDER:
The petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus declaring the order of 3rd respondent in KNT:LPG: Proddatur dated 18.02.2011, rejecting the petitioner’s case for appointment as distributor to the LPG gas agency in Proddatur, Kadapa District pursuant to notification dated 01.10.2007 on immaterial and unsustainable grounds though the petitioner is fully eligible for appointment as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the aforesaid proceedings with a further direction to the respondents to award the Domestic LPG Distributorship at Proddatur, Kadapa District in favour of petitioner.
2
saturation at Proddatur and therefore no advertisements were given at Proddatur for the year 2016-17. In that view of the matter, learned counsel for respondents would submit, the request of the petitioner to appoint him as distributor to the LPG gas agency in Proddatur, Kadapa District on behalf of respondents does not arise and therefore, the writ petition may be dismissed.
petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand
closed. _________________________ U. DURGA PRASAD RAO, J Date: 17.09.2018 Murthy
Petitioner
Respondents
U. Durga Prasad Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
