Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of certiorari was dismissed as infructuous because the High Court had not previously suspended the operation of the Tribunal's order under review.
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.
[3318 ]
i
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 24049 OF 2012
Between:
...PETITIONERS
AND
Vidhan Rao Ramy al a, D/o. Vidhana Rao Narayana, aged about 34 years. Unemployee, R/o. H, No.1-9-533/1 Adilanet, Vidyanagar, Hyderabad.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to lssue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF CERTIORARI and call for the records relating io and connected with O.A. No. 8943 of 201 1 with CA. No. 1 99 12012 with V MA.NI.2521201 2 on the file of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, and to quash or set aside the order dated.29-02-2012 in 0A.No.8943 of 201 1 with CA.No.199/2012 with VMA.NO.25212012 by holding as erroneous and contrary to law.
I
il q
WPMP. NO:30]t29 )F 2012
Petition unde" Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated tn the affidavit filed ir support of the petition, the High Court rr;y bepleased to suspend the operal on of orders dated. 29-02-2012 in O.A No.8'143 of 201 1 with CA.No 199/2012 wi h VMA.No.25212012 on the file of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh Administrative TribL T al, Hyderabad, pendang disposal of the writ petitron.
Counsel for th€, Pe itioners: GP FOR SERVICES-l
Counsel for the Re ;pondent: SRI P. VEERABHADRA REDDY
The Court made th,following: ORDER
I
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
WRI? PETITION No.24O49 of 2072
ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shauili)
When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is noticed that this Hon'ble Court has not suspended the operation ol the Tribuna-l's Ordcr dt.29.02.2012 in O.A.No.B943 of 2011 and which would mean that the order ol Ccntral Administrative Tribunal has been u,orkcd out itself. Thus, rcndering thc prescnt Writ Petition as infructuous. [n vi cvr, of the same, the cause in the Writ Petition docs not survive.
SD/.N.SRIHARI ASSISTANARFGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// L*:./ SECTION OFFICER
To,
GJ BS \s'
I I I
HIGH COUR T
DATED:2711)12022
ORDER
WP.No.2404l ot 2012
:r:-
1
t (? ,
.t
,rv j:v
)
(J
sS:
(i:r a
o' cFr iL
i- --...,.:,/', '-
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCl UOUS WITHOUT GI)STS
5cd's w- 6(*
Government of Andhra Pradesh
Vidhan Rao Ramy al a
Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Namavaru Rajeshwar Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
