Telangana High Court
WP/26111/2006 of T. Rajendra, Vs Nizam Institute of Medical Sciences, on 26 December 2006
COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND SIX :PRESENT: THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 26111 of 2006 Between: T. Rajendra, S/o.T.P. Maharadhi, R/o. 1356, Road No.45, Jubilee
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND SIX
:PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE G.ROHINIWRIT PETITION NO : 26111 of 2006
Between:
T. Rajendra, S/o.T.P. Maharadhi,
R/o. 1356, Road No.45, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad.
..... Petitioner
AND
Nizam Institute of Medical Sciences, rep. by its Executive Registrar,Punjagutta, Hyderabad.
.....Respondent
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased toissue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring that the action ofthe respondent in issuing the impugned tender notification bearing Rc. No. Misc/2006/1/HRD/H1, dated 29.11.2006, published in Vartha Telugu Daily Newspaper,dated 02.12.2006, calling for tenders with regard to the contract of supply ofunskilled and semi-skilled labour to the respondent institute with effect from01.01.2007 to 31.12.2009 without enabling the petitioner to have adjudication of thedispute relating to renewal of the present contract resolved by Arbitrary Tribunal asper clause 18 of the Agreement, dated 18.09.2003, is arbitrary and illegal andconsequently direct the respondent institute not to introduce third parties into thesubject matter relating to supply of unskilled and semi-skilled labour to the institute (the contract covered by agreement between the petitioner and the respondentinstitute, dated 18.09.2003)
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and theaffidavit filed in support there of and the order of the High Court dated 18.12.2006made herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Vedula Venkataramana,Advocate for the Petitioner, and of Sri S.S.Bhatt, Advocate for the respondent, thecourt made the following:
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:
“ Counter filed.
Heard both sides.
Post on 26.12.2006 for judgment.
Till then, the interim order granted earlier shall continue. ’’
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
// TRUE COPY //
for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
To
1. The Executive Registrar, Nizam Institute of Medical Sciences, Punjagutta, Hyderabad. (by RPAD)
2. One C.C.to Sri Vedula Venkataramana, Advocate. (OPUC)
3. One spare copy.
RV
RV
Dated 21.12.2006
HIGH COURT
RG.J.
DATED 20-12-2006
POST ON 26-12-2006 FOR JUDGMENT
ORDER
W.P.NO. 26111 OF 2006
Extension
RV
Dated 21.12.2006
HIGH COURT
RG.J.
DATED 20-12-2006
POST ON 26-12-2006 FOR JUDGMENT
BSR
DT. 19-12-2006
ORDER
W.P.NO. 26111 OF 2006
Extension
HIGH COURT
RG.J.
DATED 18-12-2006
POST ON 20-12-2006 FOR ADMISSION
ORDER
W.P.NO. 26111 OF 2006