Telangana High Court
WA/1823/2008 of Vasavi College of Engineering, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, on 30 December 2008
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 1823 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABADTUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHTPRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICEand THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY
WRIT APPEAL NO : 1823 of 2008
(Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Orderdated 23/12/2008 in WP NO : 27953 OF 2008 on the file of the HighCourt.)
Between:
Vasavi College of Engineering, Rep. by its Secretary, R/o. 9-5-81, Ibrahimbagh, Hyderabad-500 031.
..... APPELLANT
AND
1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of TechnicalEducation, Rep. by Commissioner of Technical Education, BRKR Bhavan, TankBund, Hyderabad.2 S. Rajender, S/o. S. Raghavender, R/o. 1-1-289/1, Plot No. 8/A, Road No.7, Balaji Nagar Colony, Mohan Nagar, Kothapet, Hyderabad.
.....RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Appellant:MR.M.RAVINDRANATH REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR EDUCATION
The Court made the following :
JUDGMENT: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ)
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.
1. Being aggrieved by an interim order dated 23-12-2008 passed inW.P.M.P.No. 36632 of 2008 in W.P.No. 27953 of 2008, this appeal hasbeen filed by the respondent-Management.
2. By virtue of the impugned order, the original petitioner, who wasremoved from service has been permitted to be reinstated in to service. Inour opinion, by virtue of the impugned order, practically the petition hasbeen allowed and, therefore, without permitting the respondent-employerto file its counter, the said W.P.M.P should not have been heard.
3. It is agreed by the present appellant and respondent No.1 thatthey shall file their counter within ten days from today and copies of thecounters shall be served upon the learned Advocate appearing for theoriginal petitioner within three days therefrom.
4. We direct that W.P.M.P.No. 36632 of 2008 be notified before thelearned single Judge on 20-1-2009 and all the learned Advocates haveassured this Court that they would not pray for time on that day so as toenable the learned single Judge to decide the W.P.M.P. finally.
5. The appeal stands allowed in view of the above order and theimpugned order is quashed.
6. It is further directed that till the W.P.M.P. is finally decided, theparties shall maintain status-quo existing as on today.
______________________
ANIL R. DAVE, CJ
30[th] December, 2008.
GRR
__________________________
R. SUBHASH REDDY, J