M. Shiva Kumar v. The District Collector / Chairman, Medak District Scheduled Caste SErvice
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 15 Feb 2010
- Bench
- NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
Petition under Arltcle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus decla'ring the action of the respondents in not reviewing the order of suspension of the applicant vide proc. No. AJ817lEstt/2008, dated 6.11.2008 in terms of the orders of the Government in G.O.Ms.No. 86, GAD., Dated 8-3-1994 is as illegal, arbitrary and consequently hold that the petitioner is entitled for reinstatement to duty as Work lnspector Grade - I in terms of Lr.Rc.No. LC-1|314|APSC|2O1O' dated 15-02-2010 with all consequential benefits. l.A. NO: 1 OF 20'10 WPMP. NO: 't6436 OF 2010 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumslances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may oe pleased to direct the respond,-.nts 3 and 4 to forthwith issue posting orders to the petitioner as work lnspector Grade - I rn terms of direction issued by the 5th respondent inlr. Rc.No. LC- 1 i3 1 4/APSC/20 1 0 dated 1 5.02.20 10. Counsel for Petitioner: SRI K.VENKAT REDDY, rep., SRI D.BALA KISHAN RAO Counsel for the flerspondents: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRT JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RA"'EStItrIAR RAO Writ Petition No.13O44 of2OlO
ORDER:
Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing Mr. K.Venkat Reddy, learned counsel, representing Mr. D.Balakishen Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the subject matter of this writ petition has become infi-uctuous. 2 In view of the above submission, the present writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. I //TRUE COPY// SD/.V. KAVITHA ASSISTANT REGTSTRAR CTION OFFICER To,
One CC to SRI D.BALA KISHAN RAO, Advocate [OPUC]
Two CCs to GP FOR COOPERATION' High Court for the State of Telangana
Two CD CoPies BSK KKS , n iiT ,qi€ l'i.i'' e J c o I I 0 5 l,tAH 2025 C * o [,(;i,.1] Cvi r-O "{' HIGH COURT DATED:1 010112025 ORDER WP.No.13044 of 2010 DISMISSINCJ THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS / /. /1 /9,/t ,/6
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Telangana High Court, on 15 Feb 2010. The bench was NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO.
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.