Writ petition filed by an employee of Andhra Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation seeking promotion was dismissed as infructuous because the cause of action did not survive the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh.
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.
/
[3167 ]
tN THE HIGHCOURT FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY ,THETWENTY FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY THREE
a
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLESRI JUSTICEA.ABHISHEKREDDY
Between:
T.S. Veera Narayana,S/o. Jaganrlqlakul.u, 4qedabout .4.! .V9al9t.-D,9PutY Manager, Haritha-Restaurant,Kohir X Roads, Zaheerabad,MedaK Ulsmcl'
...PETITIONER
AND
1.'The Andhra PradeshTourism Development Corporation,Lamitqd,Hyderabad iepr"Jentia Oy.iisChairman and Mariaging Director, 3-5-891, TourismHouse, Hiinayathnagar, HYderabad.
3..R.V. SureshKumar Reddy, Deputy Managbr (Contract), A.P.T.D.C.,(DVM), Kurnool.
...RESPONDENTS
petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances state{in the affidavit filed therewith,the HighCourt maybe pleased to lssue a writ, order or directionmore in the nature of Mandamus declaiing the Proc.No.APTDC/AdmnlP1l38l2}11, dated 1-9-2012 and its consequential Proc.No.APTDC/Admn/P1t3812011,dated 24-09-2012issued by the 2nd respondentin so far as postingthe respondents3 and 4 as Divisional Managers are concernedaS illegal,arbitrary,unjust, discriminatoryand subversive of Articles14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution and consequently hold that thepetitioneris entitted for promotion/posting as Divisional Manager.
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2012(WPMP.NO:43870OF 2012)
petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in supportof the petition, the High Courtmay be pleased direct the respondentsto considerthe case of the petitioner for posting as Divisional Manager bysuspendingthe operationof theProc.No. ApTDC/Admn/p1t3gt2o11, dated 1-9-2012 and its consequentialProc.No. ApTDC/Admn/p1t3gl2o11, dated24-9-2012 in so far as postingthe respondents 3 and'4 areDivisional Managers are concerned.
Counsel for thePetitioner:SRl. P NARASIMHA
Gounsel for theRespondent No.1: SRl. A K NARASIMHA RAO
Counsel for theRespondent No.2,3and 4:--
The Court madethe following:ORDER
,,// /"
THE HON'BLE SRI .IUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY
IIIRIT PETITION No.34512 of 2O12
ORDER:
The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner has been allotted to the State of Andhra Pradesh pursu€rnt to the bifurcation of the composite State of Andhra Pradesh. Therefore, the cause in the present writ petition does not survive for adjudication.
In view of the above made submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if €rny, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
SD/.K.SREERAMAMURTY ASSISTANT //TRUE COPY//
=]rt
To, 1. One CC toSri, P Narasimha,Advocqtg[OPUCL^. ,^ i. Oil cc io Sri.hK NarasimhaRao, Advocate IOPUC] 3. Two CDCoPies
TJ BSw-
\
HIGH COURT
DATED:2410212023
ORDER
6).>
.\y
=$
1). \t<br>ri "L
..r Li
WP.No.34512 of 2012
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION
AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS.
5- @rol'lo''
T.S. Veera Narayana
The Andhra Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation
A. Abhishekrreddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
