The High Court of Telangana dismissed a writ appeal (originally filed before the petitioner's retirement) as infructuous since the appellant retired from service during the pendency of the appeal.
The writ appeal 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.
\
I3s18I
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
WRIT APPEAL NO: 439 OF 2013
Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against order dated 20-02-20'13 in W.P.No.5059 of 2013 on the file of the High Court.
Between:
Mr. Y-Janardhan Reddy, S/o. Y.Raghava Reddy, Aged 52years, Occ Assistant Engineer (Mechanical) R/o. H.No.'l-8812, Flat No.2, Behind Vikram Hospitals, Madhapur, Hyderabad - 500 081 .
...APPELLANT/PETTTIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
l.A. NO: I OF 2013(WAMP. NO: 1109 OF 2013)
Petition under Section 151 CPCpraying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, the High Court may bepleased to direct the respondents 1 and 2 at least topay the subsistence allowance to the petitioner/appellant, pending disposal of the main Writ Appeal.
Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. T LAKSHM! NARAYANA
Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: M/s. V.UMA OEVI, SC FOR TS GENCO
Counsel forthe Respondent No.3: GP FOR ENERGY
Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI R.VINOD REDDY, TS SC FOR TRANSCO
The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT
l 0
h
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
WRIT APPEAL No.439 OF 2013
JUDGMENT: (PeT AKS,J)
When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the appellant has informed the Court that during pendency of the Writ Appeal, the appellant has retired from service, thus rendering the Writ Appeal as infructuous.
as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous Applications, if any, pending in this Writ
Appeal, shall stand closed.
,ffRUECOPY/'
o="'3{itSS+HhA/
€)--
SECTIONOFFIGER
o lv3"P"?:ot"totpr'o*
5.Two CD CoPies
BSR
GJP g
l7
HIGH COURT
DATED: 2211112023
JUDGMENT
WA.No.439 of 2013
1 HE STA fc
(
3 o5JAN 202{ a
O5' S PATC
DISMISSING THE WRIT APPEAL
AS INFRUCTUOUS,
WITHOUT COSTS
@e yk
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ appeal which was pending during the pendency of the main contest could be sustained after retirement of the petitioner.
Mr. Y-Janardhan Reddy
The Andhra Pradesh Generation Corporation Limited
Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
