The High Court of Telangana held a writ appeal infructuous upon the inform matters. The writ appeal was dismissed accordingly, with miscellaneous applications remaining pending to be closed.
Dismissal of the writ appeal as infructuous
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.
t3318I
li il|. i t. I I :
\
rr
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEI!4BER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
WRIT AP PEAL NO: 1 3s6 0F 2011
_
Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 1B-10-20i1 in WP No.29418of 2O1Oon the fite of theHigh Court. Between:
,.Appellants/ Leave Petitioners
; AND
Respondents/ Writ Petitioners
I I I l
I I I i
t
2
RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS
I.ANO:3 OF 2011 P. NO: 2850 OF 2011!
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 direct APCPDCL Respondent No.6, 8 andg not to revert the Petitioners herein from the category of Asst. Divisional Engineers to Asst. Engineers on the basis of the order in W.P.No.29418 of 2010, dated 18-10-2011.
Counsel for Appellants : SRI N.ASHWANI KUMAR Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 & 22 : SRI K.R.PRABHAKAR Counsel for Respondent Nos.2, 4 to 18 & 21 : SRI R.V|NOD REDDY Counsel for Respondent No.3 : -
Counsel for Respondent No.19 : - The Court made the following Judgment : -
7
THE HON'B LE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR STIAVILI
AITD
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHqIARRAO
WRIT APPEAL No.1356 of2O11
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hoft'ble Sn Jusl@e Abhinand Kumar Shauili)
Learned counsel for the appellants has informed the
Court that the writ appeal has become infructuous.
infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs
any, in this Writ Appeal, shall stand closed.
To
//TRUECOPY//
I One CC toSri N.Ashwani Kumar, Advocate-[gPucl 2 5.# 6d iJ 5iir.n.C,aonakar,AdvocatetqP-V.c^L J il; 66 i6Sii r{VinooReddv, Advocate[oPUC] 4 Two CDCoPies
SD/- K. S/[ILESHI DEPUTYREGhTRAR sEcrroN ofi6en
SA GJP
B
n
I I
HIGH COURT
DATED:21 11112023
JUDGMENT
WA.No.1356 of 2011
SIAT€ o
u sE[ $8
.loo tt
t
i o E o 5 (l
DISIVIISSING THE W.A Ag D.JFR/cTuout &ADrrpMemus wrruou r cosrs.
@n'o &e,-{6P
B. Showraiah
U. Sambaiah
G. Nageswara Rao
B. Gopalulu
G. Rajendreg
A.P. Transco
Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
