Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwarrao dismissed a writ petition under Article 226 challenging removal proceedings of a lecturer as infructuous, as the petitioner acknowledged the cause did not survive adjudication.
No order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed.
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.
[3304 I
IN THE HIGH COURTFORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYOERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPURA'ESHWARRAO
Vi,RIT PETITIO N NO: 12923OF 2008
Between:
K.V. Ramesh Chowdary,S/o. Late Sri Venkaiah,aged. abou!47 years,. Junior Lecturer in Chemistry,St. MarysCentenary Junior College, Secunderabad.
...PETII1ONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Arlicle226of the Constitutionof lndia praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavitfiledtherewith,the High Courtmay be pleased to issue any writ order or directionmore particularly o{re in the name of Mandamus declaringthe impugned proceedingsin Rc No.HAES/20O8-2009dt' 28-5-2OOB of the2M n Respondent as arbitrary illegal, and Contrary to law andby nullifying same directcontinuance of the petitioner in the 4th Respondentcollege
in the post of Junior Lecturer in French with all conse,l,ential and attendant
benefits.
Counsel for the Petitioner: ils. G.R. MERCY VTJAYA REP' IESENTING SRI.PBVIJAYKUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.l to 3: M/S C SINDHU KL ll/lARl
Counsel for the Respondent No.4: i,IADOELA RAVINDER
The Court made the followlng: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPURAJESHWARRAO
WRIT PETITION No.l 2923()F 2008
ORDER
Ms. G.R. Mercy Vijaya, learned counselrepresenting Sri P.B. Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for thepetitioner, informed this Court that the cause in the WritPetitiondoes not survive for adjudication and the WritPetitionhas become infructuous.
dismissed as infructuous. There shall beno order as to costs.
Miscellaneouspetitions pending, if any, shallstand closed
Sd/.K.BHAVANI SISTANT R
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To,
1 One CC to Sri P. B. Miav Kumar,Advocate [OPUC] 2 One CC to M/s. C. Sin6hi-r Kumari,Advocate [oPUC] 3 One CC to Sri MaddelaRavinder, Advocate [OPUCI 4. Two CD Copies TJ
PMK
I
l
HIGH COURT
DATED:1 510912025
ORDER
WP.No.12923 of 2008
=r==-
iilHt- : 't16.
o 1 / Jr i I ( I
,
rt
i
'I '(
,l
:
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS IN FRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
@
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition declaring removal proceedings illegal should be allowed despite lack of survival for adjudication.
Whether the High Court can dismiss a continuing jurisdictional petition as infructuous.
K.V. Ramesh Chowdary
Hyderabad Archdiocese Educational Society
The Secretary, Board of Intermediate Education
The Principal, St. Mary'sCentenary Junior College
The Principal, St. Joseph's Junior College
Sri Tumma Solomon Reddy
NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWARRAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
