Telangana High Court
WP/19111/1997 of A.P.S.R.C.T., Vs Sri K.V.Ramana, on 31 December 2004
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO : 19111 of 1997 Between: A.P.S.R.C.T., Rep.by it's Managing Director, Mushirabad,
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA
WRIT PETITION NO : 19111 of 1997
Between:
A.P.S.R.C.T., Rep.by it's Managing Director, Mushirabad, Hyderabad.
..... PETITIONER
AND
1 Sri K.V.Ramana, S/o. Pydithalli Naidu, Gantyada , Vizianagaram Dist.
2 K.Kondala Rao, S/o. Pydithalli Naidu,
Gantyada , Vizianagaram Dist.
3 Regional Transport Authority, rep.by it's Secretary, Vizianagaram .
4 State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Rep.by it's Presiding Officer, A.P., Hyderabad.
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased toissue an appropriate writ, order of direction, especially in the nature of writ ofCertiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order dt.9-6-97 made inM.P.No.364/96 in M.P.No.244/96 in R.P.NO.57/96 on the file of the 4th respondentvacating the order of status-quo and quash the same as being illegal, withoutjurisdiction and invalid.
Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.K.Srivanivasa Rao Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 : P.rAJAGOPALACHARY
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 and 4: GP FOR TRANSPORT
The Court made the following ORDER:
It is represented that the main revision itself had been disposed of. In view of thesame, the writ petition became infructuous.
Accordingly, the writ petition is hereby dismissed as having becomeinfructuous.
Dated : 31[st] December, 2004.
______________
P.S.NARAYANA, J
Sh
To
1 The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Vizianagaram .
2 The Presiding Officer, State Transport Appellate Tribunal, A.P., Hyderabad.Tribunal, A.P., Hyderabad.
3. 2CCs to the G.P.for Transport, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT).
4. 2CD copies