Maharaja Alak Narayana Society of Arts & Science Trust v. Provident
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue rule nisi calling for the records to issue any appropriate writ, order direction more especially one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring notice illegal, P/VSP/Circle/56/AP/17691/CA/324 dt.9-7-2007 ultravires, Opposed to the Provisions of the Act 19/1952 as arbitrary and without jurisdiction or power and hence void and respondent proceedings 1st Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.ADINARAYANA RAJU Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.R.N.Reddy (Sc For Employ's Pf Org.) The Court made the following :
ORAL ORDER:
Operative part
This writ petition is filed questioning the notice P/VSP/Circle/56/AP/17691/CA/324 dt.9.7.2007 issued by the first respondent is illegal, ultravires, Opposed to the Provisions of the Act 19/1952. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, the Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and the same has become infructuous. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. 4th March, 2009 Js. ________________
(N.V.RAMANA, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Opposed to the Provisions of the Act.
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.