Dismissed

Koppula Krishna v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC16 Mar 2023WP/34763/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana analyzed a writ petition challenging the non-appointment of the petitioner on compassionate grounds. Lacking petitioner representation on the date of disposal, the Court was satisfied that the petitioner had abandoned the case and dismissed the petition for non-prosecution.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed for non-prosecution; miscellaneous applications closed.

Koppula Krishna Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁷ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO :34763 OF 2012

¶7

Between:

¶8

[gppula^{Krishna,S/o Late. Ramgly,AOed} .about^{29 years,} Occ ; Un-emptoyee, Ryo.H.No.1-'l -227, KothaGudem. Village and Mandat Kh5mmjm Oistiict.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Government ofAndhra pradesh, Rep by the principar secretary schoor Education Department, A. p. Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The commissioner & Director of schoor Education, saiflbad, Hyderabad. ,.{

¶13

The Regional Joint Director of schoor Education, waranga) Region, warangar District.

¶14

The District Educational Officer, Khammam District Khammam.

¶15

sri Rama chandra High schoor, Kothagudem, Khammam District, rep by the Correspondent.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition Under Article 226 ot the constitution of lndia praying that in the-0" circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High'cor.t ,rv pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly on-e in tne natuie ot writ of Mandamus decraring. the action of the respondents in not afpointin!1ne q_e!'troler on compassionate grounds in terms of GoMsNo..r tc eoucition (sE.PS.l) Department dated: 6.10.2009 in the existing vacancies available in 5th respondent school as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, disciminatory and violative-of principles of natural justice and consequenily direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner on compassionate grounds in terms of G.o.Ms.No1 t s eout;tion (SE.PS.l) Department dated 6. 1 0.2009.

¶18

I.A.NO:1 OF 2012(WP MP. NO: 44212 OF 20'l2l

¶19

Petition Under section 15i 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 respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds in the existing vacancies available in the Sth respondent school pending disposal of the wrrt petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI.GANG|SETTY RAJESWARA RAO

¶21

Counsel forthe Respondents : GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATTON

¶22

The Court made the following ORDER

¶23

¶24

¶25

THE HON'BtE SRI JUSTICE A. AEHISHEK REDDY

¶26

WRIT PETITION o.34763 ot 2OL2

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

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 09.03.2023. 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.

¶29

Having regard to the above, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is not interested to pursue the present Writ petition.

¶30

Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶31

Miscellaneo_us applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

¶32

SD/-SRIHARI

¶33

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR AD SECTION OFFICER

¶34

//TRUE COPY//

¶35

¶36

'1. Two CCs to GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] 2. One cC to SRt.GnruGlsETTY^{RAJESWARA RAO, Advocate} [OPUC] 3. Two CD Copies SA SB

¶37

HIGH COURT

¶38

DATED:1610312023

¶39

r9 STATE Ori
1<br>\\ NS 1
l.) \
/

ORDER

WP.No.34763 of 2012

DISMISSING THE W.P

FOR NON - PROSECUTION

¶44

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶45

N^
u? <br>

Koppula Krishna v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Koppula Krishna v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Dr. G. Jagath Reddys Bio Science Proprietary Concern Vs E. Venkata Narasimha Reddy

K.Pavan Kumar.R.R.Dist. Vs Secty.,Union of INDIA.N.DELHI.AND4 Others.

Smt.B.Lakshmi Bai. Vs Secty.,S.a.P.Finance DEPT,HYD.AND4 Others

R. Beeraiah Vs The Mandal Development Officer

G. Srinivas, Vs The Regional Manager

M. Gunavathi, Vs The Chairman and Managing Director, Air India Limited