Andhra Pradesh High Court
WRIT PETITION 4381 of 2007 on 29 September 2006
APHC010276662007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA ANDTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA
WRIT PETITION No.4381 OF 2007
Between:
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. The Transport Commissioner, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, and others.
...Petitioners
AND
Sri Bhima Rao, Asst. Motor Vehicles Inspector, Bhimavaram, East Godavari District.
...Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioners : G.P. for Services – II
Counsel for the Respondent :
-----
The Court made the following ORDER:(per Hon’ble NJS,J)
The writ petition is filed by the State against the orders dated 29.9.2006 in O.A. No.2745 of 2006 on the file of the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad.
2. The respondent herein filed the said O.A., for a direction to include his name in the panel of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspectors fit for promotion to the post of Motor Vehicle Inspector, after declaring the Memo dated 02.2.2005 issued by the respondent No.1 therein as arbitrary, illegal etc. Through the impugned order, the learned Tribunal, following its earlier order dated 26.9.2006 in O.A. No.309 of 2005, set WP_4905_2007
aside the Memo dated 02.2.2005 and directed the official respondents to consider the case of the respondent/applicant for promotion to the post of Motor Vehicle Inspector against the available roster point for the panel year 2004–’05, if he is otherwise eligible and suitable and comes within the zone of consideration. It is pertinent to mention here that the learned Tribunal allowed O.A. No.309 of 2005 by relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in R.K.Sabharwal vs. State of Punjab[1].
3. Though the present writ petition, assailing the said order, was filed in the year 2007, no interim orders were granted suspending the orders passed by the learned Tribunal. Considering the said aspect coupled with afflux of time, this Court is not inclined to examine the matter on merits.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________
NINALA JAYASURYA,J
October 13, 2025 vasu
_____________________________
TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA,J