Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/27459/2013 of Sri.E.Jagadish, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh on 31 December 2024
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3310] TUESDAY , THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 27459/2013 Between: Sri.e.jagadish, ...PETITIONER AND The Government Of Andhra
APHC010299202013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3310]
TUESDAY ,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 27459/2013
Between:
Sri.e.jagadish, ...PETITIONER
AND
The Government Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
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. ELEVATED AS JUDGE
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. V T M PRASAD
2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS
The Court made the following Order:
This Writ Petition is filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:
“….to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not paying the salary @ Rs.6,700/- to the petitioner from October, 2012 to till date as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and in violation of the principles of natural justice and consequentially direct the Respondents to pay the salary @
Rs.6,700/- to the petitioner continually without any break by regularizing his services….”
2. On verifying the proceeding sheet, it is observed that, on an earlier occasion i.e., on 15.11.2024, as the learned counsel for the petitioner was elevated as Judge for the State of High Court of Andhra Pradesh, this Court directed the Registry to send notice to the petitioner. Apparently, the registry has sent notice to the petitioner and the same was returned unserved with an endorsement “No such addressee in Door Number.”
3. In view of non-availability of the petitioner, this Court cannot adjudicate the matter.
4. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed as non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs.
5. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
BMS
__________________________
Dr. K. MANMADHA RAO, J