The High Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous after learning that the matter was no longer subsisting, without any further reasoning regarding the merits.
Petition dismissed as infructuous pending miscellaneous petitions also dismissed.
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.
HIGH COURT FOR THESTATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
[31671
THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETHDAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND ANDTWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICEA. ABHISHEKREDDY
WRIT PETITIO N NO: 39280 OF2012
Between:
Sved Doulat Hussain, S/o lateSyed Ahmed Hussain, aged about 31 years' Occ: U.D Typist in Wakf Board, Wo 2-3-5d4l14lBi21Akash Nagar, Amberpet' Hyderabad.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of theConstitutionof lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavitfiledtherewith,the High Courtmay be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction moreparticularly one in the nature of MANDAMUS declaring theimpugned proceedingsbearingFile No.E1l24l2O1't dated 28-9-2012passed bythe1 st band2ndrespondents promoting the respondent 3, and 4 herein from the cadre of SeniorAssistantto Superintendent as being illegal arbitrary,capricious, malafide, contrary to service regulations of 1963, not only violativeof principlesof naturaljusticebut violative of Article 14 of Constitution of lndia.
il2il
l.A. NO: 1OF 2012(WPMP. NO: 49878 OF 2012)
Petition under Sectron 151 CPCpraying thatin the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, theHigh Court may be pleasedto grant interim suspension of the operation of theimpugnedorder bearingFile No.E1t24l2O11 dated 28-9-2012passed by the1st and 2nd respondents promoting the respondent 3 and 4 herein from the cadreof senior Assistant to Superintendentpending disposal ofthe above WritPetition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. M.MEHDI HUSSAIN
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1& 2: SRI ABU AKRAM, SC FOR WAKF BOARD
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 &4: NONEAPPEARED
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI IUSTICEA. ABHISHEKREDDY
WRIT PETITION No.39280of 2012
ORDER:
The learned counsel for the petitionerstates that the matter
has become infructuous.
Recording the said statement,the WritPetition is dismissed
as infruc tuous "
Pending Miscellaneous Petitionsshall also stand dismissed
No order as to costs.
To,
SD/. K.SREERAMAMURTHY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR -\ sEcTl+ oFFlcER
//TRUE COPY//
CHGJtc\sR
HIGH COURT
DATED:2010412023
ORDER
I
4..
$
_
q
At
W.P.No.39280 of2012
DISMISSINGTHE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
,u*.*S
Sved Doulat Hussain
The A.P. State Wakf Board
A. Abhishekreddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
