Writ petition challenging non-regularization of services was dismissed for non-prosecution as petitioner's counsel did not appear on multiple hearing dates despite court directions.
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.
131671
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY
WRIT PETITIO N NO:27251 OF 2012
Between:
M. Gunavathi, Wife of M.Nagaraj, aged about41 years,Occ: Empbyee,residingat H.No.210Al, Sanjeevayya Nagar Colony" West Manedpally, Secunderabad.
...PET]TIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndiapraying thatin the circumstances stated in the affidavitfiled therewith,the High Courtmay be pleased to issue an appropriate Order or writ, moreparticularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by directing therespondents, a)to regularize the services of the petitioner herein in thepost of Casual Typistfrom the initial date of her appointment, b) to retain and conlinue thepetitioner in her respective place of working with all consequential benefits and attendantbenefits, c) after holding the action of respondents in notregularizingthe services of the petitioner,as bad, illegal, irrational, arbitrary, discriminatory,void, violative of the Article '14, 16, 21 and 226 of the Constitution of lndia.
|.A.NO:1 OF 201 , IPMP. NO: 3469 2 0F 20121
Petition Undr r Section 151 CPCpraying that in the :i'cunslances stated in the affidavit filecl in support of thepetition, the High Cour: may bepleasedto direct the respond,,nr.s to retain and continue thepetitior er in her respective place of working, 'r'ithout affecting any artificial break, perxJrng disposal of the above writ petition.
Counsel for the Pelitioner : SRI.KADARI RAMA REDDY
Counsel for the Re:pondents : -
The Coud made th( fi:llowing ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRT ]USTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
WRTT PETITION NO. 2725L OT 2O,.2
ORDER:
On 24.02.2023, when the present.Writ Petition was taken up, there was no representation on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner, as such, the present Writ Petition was directed to be posted under the caption 'For Orders' on 07.03.2023. Thereafter, on 09.03.2023, when the matter was taken up, there was no representation on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Having regard to the same, this Court has directed the Registry to list the present Writ Petition on 16.03.2023 under the caption 'For Dismissal'. Even today, there is no representation on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Having regard to the above, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is not interested to pursue the present Writ Petition.
Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pendinq, shall stand closed.
I
SO/.N. SRTHARI ASSISTANTAH;IsrRAR //rRUE coPY// SECTION oFFtcER
To 2. 1. One Two CC CD to CooiesSR|.KADARI RAMA REDDY, Advocate tOpUCI S.A GJP ?
HIGH COURT
DATED:16103,2023
r-' - ', r.r .. -'..
-' (.. ,
r ':,
/.
., '<br>/r)
t_
[,r illv?Ml ll
.- ), ..:'./
ORDER
WP.No.27251 of 2012
DtsMtsstNc'l'HE W.P
FOR NON - P[IOSECUTION
WITHOUT CO:IiTS.
tr2 -lt\o*
M. Gunavathi
Chairman and Managing Director, Air India Limited
Regional Director, Southern Region, Air India Limited
Deputy General Manager, Air India Limited
Abhishek Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
