✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court

G. Anthony Joseph v. University, Hyderabad

Writ Petition No. 801 of 2001N V RAMANA

Case at a glance

Outcome

Dismissed

Recording the same, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous

Provisions considered

Judgment

Cause title

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA

WRIT PETITION NO.801 of 2001 Between: G. Anthony Joseph S/o G.Yesaiah R/o 4-30, Chinmaya Nagar, Anantapur. AND ..... PETITIONER

1 The Convenor, ECET(FDH)-2000, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad. 2 The Vice-Chancellor, Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati. 3 The Commissioner, Admissions, Technical Education, Govt of A.P., Posnett Bhavan, Boggula Kunta, Hyd. .....RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the respondents herein to allot a free seat to the petitioner for B.Tech (Mechanical Engineering) course under BC-C Category forthwith. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.R.PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.1:

Mr. K. Rathangapani Reddy Counsel for the Respondent No.3: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION The Court made the following:

ORDER:

Operative part

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and it has become infructuous. Recording the same, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. No costs. _______________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 14.06.2005 Nsr // TRUE COPY // ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Convenor, ECET(FDH)-2000, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad. 2 The Vice-Chancellor, Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati. 3 The Commissioner, Admissions, Technical Education, Govt of A.P., Posnett Bhavan, Boggula Kunta, Hyd. 4 Two CCs to GP for Higher Education, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT) 5 Two CD copies

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Recording the same, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Constitution of India — art. 226.

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. 801 of 2001). ← Search more judgments