S. Kiran Kumar, Hyderabad, A.P. v. The Vice Chairmanand Managing Director, Apsrtc.,Hyderabad,And2ot
* [ 3300 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(SPecial Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITIO N NO: 19526 OF 20lt1 Between:
s. Kiran kumar, s/o. Dharmabhushan Rao, Aged about 35 years, Electrician (out Sourcing) APSRTC., Medchal Bus Depot, Medchal, Hyderabad, A P' ...PETITIONER AND
1. The Vice Chairman & Managing Director, APSRTC, Bus Bhavan, Mushirabad, Hyderabad.
2. The Executive Director (GHZ), APSRTC., JBS., Picket, Secunderabad'
3. The Depot Manager, APSRTC., Medchal Bus Depot, Medchal, Hyderabad, A.P.
...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the respondents in treating petitioner as a non-local for the recruitment of Electrician post under notification, dt.13-11-2010 issued by the '1st respondent herein is bad, arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the APSRTC (Recruitment) Regulations, 1966 and consequently direct the respondents to appoint petitioner as Electrician by treating him as a local candidate in the said recruitment.
l.A. NO: 1OF 2011(WPMP. NO:23607 OF 20111 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in o the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to
direct the respondents to reserve one vacancy of "Electrician" post in APSRTC, Hyderabad and Secundeiabad Regions (GHZ).
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI P.VENKATESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents:
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAI{A WRIT PETITION No.19526 of 2O11
ORDER
It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the cause of action does not survive for adjudication, and the writ petition has become infructuous.
2.
Recording the submission made, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if ary, stand closed.
//TRUE COPY// "''iSBiUtfS$$iSH"^t / SECTION OFFICER To, 3ffi 33 [ 3Rl i-'"1tr1'5i,tAt T"";3fl"?31?J?3HSb 1) BSR Y Two CD CoPies BSK a\ { .1-
I HIGH COURT DATED:2 410712024 ,-.
a 1l{E 3r4 16 1$( \ 2 1 [[T 2021 /
ORDER
WP.No.19526 ot 2011 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS '))b a" 1y \) {.