R.Maheswara Rao v. State Of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed since, the relief has become infructuous. No order as to Costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. To. //TRUE COPY// Sd/- IVI SRiNIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
Judgment
#2. The District Collector, Panchayatraj Wing Srikakulam. Generation Scheme (MGNREGS) Srikakulam Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employee Development Officer, Saravakota Mandal Srikakulam ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fiied therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue an appropriate writ particularly one in or order or direction more of Writ ceedings of the 4th Respondent in Rc.No.28/2018 dated 26.02.2018 in Mandamus declaring nature appointing the 5th Respondent as Senior Mate thereby making him Field under Mahatma Gandhi National Assistant Generation Scheme Cri.,, , Srikakuiam District without foiiowing due process of law arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and i Panchayat, Saravakota Rural Employment Mandai as highly illegal, issue consequential € directions to the Respondents to appoint the Petitioner for Kidimi Gram Panchayat. Saravakota Mandal, Srikakulam District. as Field Assistant lA NO: 1 OF 201« Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances r stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to appoint the Petitioner as Field Assistant of Kidimi Gram Panchayat, Saravakota District duly considering the representation dated 02.04.2018 the Petitioner. Mandal, Srikakulam submitted by Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P RAJKUMAR Counsel for the Respondents 1 & 2: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondents 3 & 4: SRI M.S.R. CHANDRA MURTHY, SC for MGNREGS Counsel for the Respondent No.5: - The Court made the following order: 1 APHC010354412018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 16428/2018 Between: R.Maheswara Rao ...PETITIONER AND State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENTCS) Counsel for the Petitioner;
1.P rajkumar Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1 .GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (TG) The Court made the following: 2 f THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 16428/2018 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “...to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particulariy one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus deciaring the proceedings of the 4th Respondent in Rc.No. 28/2018 dated 26.02.2018 in appointing the 5th Respondent as Senior Mate thereby making him as Field Assistant under Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Generation Scheme, Kidimi Gram Panchayat, Saravakota Mandal Srikakulam District, without following due process of law as highly illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and issue consequential directions to the Respondents to appoint the Petitioner as Field Assistant for Kidimi Gram Panchayat, Saravakota Mandal, Srikakulam District and pass..."
#2. Heard Sri P.Raj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj behalf respondents is in attendance.
#3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petition may be disposed of since the relief has become infructuous in this matter.
#4. Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed since, the relief has become infructuous. No order as to Costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. To. //TRUE COPY// Sd/- IVI SRiNIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
#1. One CC to Sri P Rajkumar, Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, SC for MGNREGS [OPUCJ SECTION OFFICER Into Prades'^rJOUTT''''"'
#4. Two CD Copies RAM High Court of / T=c 0 9 APR 2025 Curreni Section 'k & m HIGH COURT DATED:11/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.16428 of 2018 DISMISSING THE WP AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 11 Mar 2025. The bench was VENKATA, VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.