Director, A.P. Trade Promotion Corpn. Hyd v. Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad
Case at a glance
- Bench
- L NARASIMHA REDDY
Outcome
Withdrawn
Permission is accorded and the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, leaving it
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
K.V.Ramana S/o. Sri K.Venkateswara Rao R/o.Flat No.404, G.V.S. Towers, Lower Tank Bund Road, Domalguda, Hyderabad - 500 029, presently working as the Special Grade Deputy Collector posted on deputation as the Executive Director, A.P. Trade Promotion Corpn. Hyd ..... PETITIONER
AND 1 The Government of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension, Department of Personnel and Training, North Bunglow, New Delhi. 2 The Union Public Service Commission, Rep. by its Secretary, Dholpur House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi. 3 The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Chief Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS
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 a Writ or Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in not furnishing the information sought by the Petitioner under his Applications dated 28.07.2008 under the Right to Information Act, 2005, as unfair, arbitrary, illegal and violative of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the Respondents to furnish the copies of the Minutes of the Meetings dated 28.5.2008 and 22.07.2008 of the Selection Committee constituted under Regulation 3 of the Indian Administrative Service (Appointment by Promotion), Regulations, 1955 and all other information sought under the Petitioner's Applications dated 28.7.2008, and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.RAVINDRANATH REDDY Counsel SOLICITOR GEN) the Respondents: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST The Court made the following :
ORDER:
Operative part
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of the Court to withdraw the Writ Petition, with liberty to pursue his remedies in accordance with law. Permission is accorded and the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue his remedies as per law. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ Dt.11.08.2008 L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J GJ
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Permission is accorded and the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, leaving it
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Right to Information Act, 2005.
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.