Dismissed

The Prl.Secretary,Randb.,Transport,Hyd.,and 9 Otrs. v. M/S. G. Eshwar Reddy, Hyd.,and 8 Otrs.

Telangana HC10 Oct 2022WA/52/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Telangana High Court dismissed a writ appeal filed by Transport Department officials against an order in a writ petition filed by a contractor. The appeal was deemed infructuous as identical appeals by the state were previously dismissed. No counsel appeared for the appellant.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was dismissed as infructuous with no costs awarded to either party.

The Prl.Secretary,Randb.,Transport,Hyd.,and 9… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

IMONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF OCTOBER

¶3

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT APPEAL NO: 52 OF 2014

¶7

Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 02.02.2010 in W.P. No. 1739 of 2010 on the file of the High Court.

¶8

Between:

¶9

1, The Principal Secretary (R & B) Transport Department, Government of A.P., Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶10

The Superintending Enginee(R&B) Rural Circle, Balkampet, Hyderabad.

¶11

The Superintending Enginee(R&B) Rural Circle, Mahabubnagar, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Superintending Enginee(R&B) Rural Circle, Medak, Sanga Reddy.

¶13

The Superintending Enginee(R&B) Rural Circle, NH, Circle, National Highways Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad.,

¶14

The Executive Enginee(R&B) City Roads, Vikarabad District.

¶15

The Executive Enginee(R&B) Roads Division, Goshamal, Hyderabad District.

¶16

The Executive Enginee(R&B) Roads Division, Sangareddy, Medak District.

¶17

The Executive Enginee(R&B) Roads Division, Mahabubnagar District.

¶18

10.The Executive Enginee(R&B) NH Division, Masab Tank, Hyderabad.

¶19

...APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS

¶20

AND

¶21

1 M/s. G. Eshwar Reddy, Special Class Contractors, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Partner, G.Srinivas Reddy, 8-2-24BlNSl29, Venkateswara Hills, Road No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.

¶22

....RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

¶23

Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep: by its Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Department (Works and Projects Dept.,), Hyderabad.

¶24

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its^{Principal Secretary,} Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶25

The Pay and Accounts Officer, Ranga^{Reddy District, at Hyderabad, Gandhi} Bhavan, MJ Road, Hyderabad.

¶26

The Pay and Accounts Officer, Projects,^{Gandhi Bhavan,MJ Road,} Hyderabad.

¶27

I I

¶28

Pay and accounts officer, Medak District at Medak.

¶29

Pay and accounts officer, Mahabubnagar District, at Mahabubnagar.

¶30

B. Regional Officer, Morth Notional Highways, Erramanzil, Hyderabad.

¶31

Regional Pay and Accounts Office(RPAO), Morth, Bangalore. (Respondent Nos. 2 to I are not necessary parties in this appeal)

¶32

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶33

WAMP. NO: 50 OF 2014

¶34

Petition under Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in suppo( of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the order dated 02.02.2010 passed in W.P.No. 173912010 in the interest of^justice, pending disposal of the writ appeal.

¶35

Counsel for the Appellant: GP FOR TRANSPORT (ROADS & BUILDINGS) (NOT PRESENT)

¶36

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: K RAGHUVEER REDDY

¶37

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT

¶38

The Court made the following: JUDGMENT

¶39

THE HON'BLE TIIE CE UJJAL I

¶40

AND

¶41

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE c.v RED DY No.52 f2 4 ORDER i (Per the Hon,bte the ChiefJustice Ujjat BhuAdn)

¶42

None appears for the appellant though Mr. K.Raghuveer Reddy, learned counsel is present for respondent No. 1_writ petitioner.

¶43

Learned counsel for respondent No. 1 submits that identical writ appeals liled by , the state have been dismissed by this Court. According to him, this appeal has also become infructuous.

¶44

3 In view of above, this Writ Appeal is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.

¶45

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

¶46

stand closed.

¶47

SD/- K.DI.IESIM DEPUTYFEgISTRAR //TRUE COPY// l'f t't/ SECTION OFFICER

¶48

To,

¶49

Two CCs to GP for Transport (Roads and Buildings), High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] 2. One CC to SRI K. RAGHUVEER REDDY, Advocate IOPUC] 3. Two CCs to GP for Finance and Planning, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶50

Two CCs to GP for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶51

Two CD Copies.

¶52

GJP MP "K

¶53

HIGH COURT

¶54

DATED:1011012022

¶55

'.s
1H SIA 14: oI
k
:.) 22 rEr2U a
,il
/.,.. ,
L- r.
JUD ENT

¶56

WA.No.S2 ot 2014

¶57

DISMISSING THE WRIT APPEAL AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS

¶58

?o^1W !,{9 gY

The Prl.Secretary,Randb.,Transport,Hyd.,and 9 Otrs. v. M/S. G. Eshwar Reddy, Hyd.,and 8 Otrs.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Prl.Secretary,Randb.,Transport,Hyd.,and 9 Otrs. v. M/S. G. Eshwar Reddy, Hyd.,and 8 Otrs.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nuclear Fuel Complex Vs The State of Telangana

Nuclear Fuel Complex Vs The State of Telangana, And 3 Others

Nuclear Fuel Complex Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

Secretary,Ministry of Healthandfamily Welfare Dept,New Delhi Vs Principal, Vaadevi Ayurvedic Medical College, Warangal

Dr. Vikram Reddy Masani, Nizamabad Dist and 31 Others Vs Prl Secy, Health, Medical and Family Welfare Dept, Hyd and 63 Ot

The Govt.of India,New Delhi, and Anr. Vs J. Surisha Dai, Karimnagar, and 36 Otrs.