Telangana High Court
WP/24670/2004 of R.S.Rao Vs TheDivisional Manager /Dy.Chief Traffic Manager on 29 December 2004
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 24670 of 2004 Between: R.S. Rao, s/o Ajal Rao, aged 35 years, Occ: RTC Conductor, R/o
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU
WRIT PETITION NO : 24670 of 2004
Between:
R.S. Rao, s/o Ajal Rao, aged 35 years,
Occ: RTC Conductor, R/o T.Gowraram,
Dindi (M), Nalgonda District.
AND
..... PETITIONER
1. The Divisional Manager/Dy.Chief Traffic Manager,APSRTC., Nalgonda Region, Nalgonda District.
2. The Depot Manager, APSRTC.,
Devarakonda Bus Depot, Nalgonda District.
....RESPONDENTS
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 an order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ ofMandamus declaring the action of the 2[nd] respondent in issuing the proceedings dated 08.11.1990 as illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently set aside the proceedings dated 08.11.1990 issued by the 2[nd] respondent and pass such otherorder or orders.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.Y.SUBBA RAO
Counsel for the Respondents: MR.V.T.M.PRASAD
The Court 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:
Challenging the proceedings dated 08-11-1990 issued by the 2[nd] respondent, thepresent writ petition is filed.
2. Admittedly, review petition is filed before the first respondent and it is stated to bepending. So, petitioner cannot be permitted to prosecute two parallel proceedings inrespect of the same proceedings.
3. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent topass appropriate orders on the review petition filed by the petitioner. No order as tocosts.
Date: 29[th] December 2004.
BSB
_____________
K.C.BHANU,J.
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
To
1. The Divisional Manager/Dy.Chief Traffic Manager,APSRTC., Nalgonda Region, Nalgonda District.
2. The Depot Manager, APSRTC.,Devarakonda Bus Depot, Nalgonda District.
3. Two CD copies.
SECTION OFFICER