Common judgment dismissing four writ appeals (Nos. 850, 852, 853, 854 of 2010) preferred by Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences against orders passed on 30.09.2010, holding that the appeals are infructuous.
Writ appeals Nos. 850, 852, 853, and 854 of 2010 dismissed as infructuous; 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.
l-
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT APPEAL NOs.850 852 853 AND 854 0F 2010
WRIT APPEAL NO: 850 OF 2010
Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent filed against the order dated 30.09.2010 in WP No. 22094 of 2O1O on the file of the High Court.
Between:
Nizam's lnstitute of Medical Sciences, Panjagutta, Hyderabad 500 082, represented by its Director
...APPELLANT (RESPONDENT NO.1 )
AND
...RESPONDENT (WRIT PETITIONER)
...RESPONDENTS (RESPONDENTS 2 & 3)
WAMP. NO: 2033 OF 2010
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the Judgment dated 30-09-2010 passed in WP.No.22094 of 2010.
Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. G. ANANDAM
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI G. VIDYASAGAR
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
Counsel for the Respondent No.3: --
WRIT APPEAL NO; 852 OF 2010
Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Lefters Patent against the Order dated 30-09-2010 in WP No. 21877 ol 2010 on the file of the High Court.
Between:
Nizam's lnstitute of Medical Sciences, Panjagutta, Hdyerabad 500 082. Rep. by its Director.
...APPELLANT (RESPONDENT NO.1 )
AND
....RESPONDENT (WRtT PETTTIONER)
...RESPONDENTS (RESPONDENTS 2, 3 & 4)
WAMP. NO: 2035 OF 2010
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the Judgment dated 30-09-2010 passed in W.P. No. 21877 of 2010.
Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. G. ANANDAM
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI G. VIDYASAGAR
Counsel forthe Respondent No.2: GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 & 4: -
WRIT APPEAL NO: 853 OF 2010
Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Lefters Patent filed against the order dated 30.09.2010 in WP.No.22092 of 2010 on the file of the High Court.
Between:
Nizam's lnstrtute of Medical Sciences, Panjagutta, Hyderabad-SO0 082 Represented by Director.
...APPELLANT (RESPONDENT NO.1 )
AND
...RESPONDENT (WRIT PETITTONER)
...RESPONDENTS (RESPONDENTS 2, 3 & 4}
WAMP. NO: 2036 OF 2010
Petition under Section 151 CPCpraying that in the circumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, the High Courtmay bepleased to suspend the operation of thejudgment dated 30.09.2010passed in W.P.No.22092 of 2010.
Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. G. ANANDAM
Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: SMT. K. UDAYA SRI
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR MED HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 & 4: -
WRIT APPEAL NO: 854 OF 2010
Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent preferred against the order dated 30.09.2010 in W.P.No.22093 of 2010 on the file of the High Court.
Between:
Nizam's lnstitute of Medical Sciences, Panjagutta, Hyderabad 500 082 Represented by Director.
...APPELLANT (RESPONDENT NO.1 )
AND
....RESPONDENT (WR|TpETTT|ONER)
...RESPONDENTS (RESPONDENTS 2 & 3)
WAMP. NO: 2037 OF 2010
I
Petition under Section 151 CPCpraying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the Judgment dated 30.09.20'10 passed in W.P.No.22093 of 2010.
Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. G. ANANDAM
Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : SRI G. VIDYASAGAR FOR SMT. K. UDAYA SRI
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR MED HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
Counsel for the Respondent No.3: -
The Court made the following: JUDGMENT
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHITYAN
AND
TILEHON'BLE SRIJUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT APPEAL Nos.SSO 852 853 and 854 of201O
COMMON JUDGMENT: (Pet the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ulct! Bhugai)
Heard Mr. G.Anandam, learned counsel for the
appellan t.
Mrscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
' stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
SD/- B. SATYAVATHI DEPUTEGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
\
To,
o'h,,-MP
HIGH COURT
DATED:0510912022
JUDGMENT
o
2 7 sEP 2tr1?
!,) lii,
,::i'9',
rlssp
"t- -, --
W.A.Nos.850, 852, 853 and 854 ot 2010
DISMISSING THE WRIT APPEALS AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
0A D-
1r\ \q?"-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether writ appeals filed under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against orders dated 30.09.2010 remain viable despite the decisions being described in submissions as infructuous.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences, Panjagutta, Hyderabad
Dr. Pavan Kumar Rao Nawa
Government of Andhra Pradesh
Dr. Mamatha Reddy C.
Ujjal Bhuyan
C.V. Bhaskar Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
