Govada Padma Rao and 2 Oths v. State of Ap., Rep.Byits Special Cheif Secretary and 3 Oths
Case brief
What is this about?
COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT…
COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT…
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.
[3300 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION NO: 33716 OF 2010
Between:
...PETITIONERS
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction order or orders declaring the action of the corporation in directing the lnternal promotion committee to award 5 marks to the candidates who were given cash awards and merit certificates while adjudicating the individual performs as communicated in the off ice order No.165/2006, dt. 17 -6-20OG as arbitrary illegal and void and consequently direct the internal promotion committee, the 4th respondent herein to fill up the 2 posts of Divisional Manager with the plantation Manages and AEMs who have completed more than 25 years and reached maximum time scale and ignore the direction issued by the
corporation in office Order No.165/2006 to award 5 marks to cash award and merit ce(ificate holders while granting merit rating for the selection.
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2010(WPMP.NO:42718 0F 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 direct the internal promotion commitlee the 4th respondent herern to fill up the 2 posts of Divisional Manager with the plar-ration Managers and AElr,4s who have completed more than 25 years and reached maximum time scale, ignoring the direction issued by the corporation in office order No.165/2006 to award 5 marks to cash award and merit certificate holders while grating merit rating for the selection as otherwise the petitioners would be put to serious and irreparable loss and hardsh ip.
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2011(WVMP. NO: 981 0F 201't )
Betwee n:
...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS
,..RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS
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 vacate the interim direction dated 05-01-201'l passed in WplVp No. 42718 of 2010 in WP No. 33716 of 2010.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M.P. CHANDRAMOULI
Counsel for the Respondents: SRI K.R. RAMAN (SC FOR Ap FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATTON)
The Court made the following: ORDER
;{
THE HONOURABLE SRII USTICE NAG ESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRITPETITION No- 33776 0F 2010
ORDER:
When the matter was taken up for hearin g on 75.09.2023, there was no tepresentation on behalf of the petitioners, hence it was directed to be Iisted on 27.09.2023 uncler the caption ,,For Dismissal". On 27.092023 learnecj counsel for the petitioners sought short adjournment. hence it was directed to be iisted on 17.10.2023.
prosecufion. No order as to costs
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if anp in
this Writ Petition. shall stand closed.
SD/- N.CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTryT REGISTRAR i/TRUE COPY// c4D To, SECTION OFFICER 1 J. ^A'IBratroBHst.o,,, *, flriEF $#$fi fffi lR ?s PsH' BN GJ
d
E:::i-----
HIGH COURT
DATED:1711012023
ORDER
S TA ra:-
'-) >
a.r 7. il
[ 7 t{[\l 202?
N'::,
WP.No.33716 ot 2010
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION FOR NON PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS
tfi
?
Govada Padma Rao
Polukonda Lakshman Rao
Kamjula Ramalinga Reddy
State of AP.
AP. Forest Development Corporation Ltd.
The Internal Promotion Committee
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court