Telangana High Court
WP/3955/1996 of D. Ravinder, Vs Secretary to Govt., on 22 December 2006
SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3955 of 1996 DATED: 22-12-2006 Between: D.Ravinder And others. … Petitioners. And Prl.Secretary to Government, Home (Printing) Depart, Hyderabad. and others. … Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.3955 of 1996
DATED: 22-12-2006
Between:D.Ravinder And others. … Petitioners.And Prl.Secretary to Government,Home (Printing) Depart, Hyderabad. and others. … Respondents.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDYWRIT PETITION No.3955 of 1996
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.
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed questioning G.O.Rt.No.170 dated 27.1.1996whereby certain trainees who were included as apprentice tenure werecontinued for a period of one year from 1.3.1995 to 29.2.1996. Apprehending their discontinuance beyond 29.2.1996 they filed thepresent writ petition.
From the record it is clear that this Court granted an interim directionon 29.2.1996. Alleging non-compliance with the said order one of thepetitioners filed contempt case No.523 of 1997 and the same was closedwith an observation that the order dated 29.2.1996 was complied with. Though the petitioners’ counsel is unable to state whether all thepetitioners have completed tenure of their apprenticeship as originallystipulated in the order dated 2.1.1995, there is no reason to believe thatthey would not have completed their respective periods of apprenticeshipwhich ranged between two years and three years. Since these periodshave expired long time back during the pendency of writ petition, I do notsee any cause surviving for adjudication on merits.
For the aforementioned reasons the writ petition is dismissed.
____________________________
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J