✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court

K.Umamaheswara Rao & Anr. v. Zonal Manager, AC Guards, Hyderabad

Writ Petition No. 15653 of 2000M VENKATESWARA REDDY

Case at a glance

Bench
M VENKATESWARA REDDY

Outcome

Dismissed

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become

Judgment

Operative part

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.VENKATESWARA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.15653 OF 2000 ORDER: This writ petition is filed with the following prayer: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that the Honourable Court may be pleased to issue an order direction or writ particularly one in the nature of writ of “Mandamus” declaring the action of the respondent herein in not following the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Excise Superintendent, Malakpatnam Vs. KBN Vishweshwar Rao reported in 1996(6) SCC 216 and not allowing the petitioners to attend the interview for the post of Sub-Staff (Class-IV) and filling up these posts through Employment Exchange only is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent to issue call letters and allow the petitioners to appear for the interview of the post of Sub-Staff (Class – IV) and consider them to appoint them without insisting that their names should be sponsored by the Employment Exchange and grant such other relief or relief as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” Interim directions were granted by this Court in W.P.M.P.No.19867 of 2000 on 24-08-2000. Thus, the respondent was directed to interview the petitioners for the post of sub-staff. The purpose of filing the writ petition having been accomplished, the writ petition has become infructuous. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. No costs. Date: 05-07-2006. ____________________________ M.VENKATESWARA REDDY,J Lrkm.

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Andhra Pradesh High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 15653 of 2000). ← Search more judgments