Telangana High Court
WP/26545/2000 of Zilla Banjara Sangham Vs The Andhra Pradesh Generation Corporation Ltd., on 31 December 2012
CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Writ Petition No.26545 of 2000 DATED:31.12.2012 Between: Zilla Banjara Sangham Represented by its Secretary, N. Kesulal Nayak, K.T.P.S., New Paloncha. … Petitioner And The Andhra Pradesh
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.
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSEAND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
Writ Petition No.26545 of 2000
DATED:31.12.2012
Between:Zilla Banjara SanghamRepresented by its Secretary,N. Kesulal Nayak, K.T.P.S.,New Paloncha.
… Petitioner
AndThe Andhra Pradesh Generation Corporation Ltd.,Hyderabad and others.
…. Respondents
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSEAND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
Writ Petition No.26545 of 2000
Order:(per the Hon’ble Chief Justice Sri Pinaki Chandra Ghose)
Challenging the action of the respondents in making appointmentto the post of Man Mazdoors, which is below the cadre of Attenders inthe V Stage of K.T.P.S., Paloncha by non-tribals, the petitionerfiled the present writ petition.
The main grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that therespondents are trying to fill up the post of Man Mazdoors by non-tribalscontrary to the Service Regulations of the respondent-Board. Petitionerfurther stated that call letters were also issued to non-tribals and theinterviews are scheduled to be held with effect from 30.12.2000.
On 29.12.2000, this Court while issuing notice to the respondents inW.P.M.P. No. 33753 of 2000, though did not grant any interim orderstaying the interviews, which are scheduled to be held on 30.12.2000,however, observed that any recruitment made during the pendency of theapplication shall abide by the result of the writ petition.
Since there was no interim order passed by the Court directing thatthe posts should be kept vacant, we are of the view that the posts mighthave already been filled up by the authorities. Further, it is also seenfrom the record that the persons who have been selected and who havebeen appointed in the said posts in pursuance of such interviews, havenot been made as parties to the writ petition and if any order is being passed at this stage, that will affect the right of those persons.Therefore, in our opinion, the settled position cannot be unsettled.
Under the circumstances, we feel that this writ petition has becomeinfructuous by efflux of time and hence the same is dismissed asinfructuous.
Even though time was granted to the respondents to file counteraffidavit, no counter affidavit is filed by the respondents. But, at thehearing, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submitted that thewrit petition has become infructuous.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
__________________________
PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, HCJ
31.12.2012
______________________
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR,J
pnb