Ram Bahadur Rana, Hyderabad v. The Govt. Of A.P. Hyderabad And Another

[ 32ee ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY ,THE FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION NO: 16491 OF 2006 Between:

RAM BAHADUR RANA, HYDERABAD, S/o. Sher Bahadur Rana, Aged 46 years, Watchman, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Secunderabad, R/o. Hyderabad.

...PETITIONER AND THE GOVT. OF A.P. HYDERABAD, Rep by its Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development Dept. Secretariat, Hyderabad. The Vice Chairman, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Paigah Palace, Secunderabad.

...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ol 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, Order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the Letter No. 1407118112005 dt. 13-4-2006 issued by the 1st respondent as arbitrary, discriminatory and contrary to the order dated 16-6-2005 in WP No. 19835 of 1998 and consequently set aside the same and direct the Respondents to regularise the services of the petitioner in the sanctioned vacant post of Watchman or any other three similarly situated petitioners in WP No. 19835/1998 and with all other consequential benefits including national seniority from the date of his initial appointment and other attendant benefits monetary and otherwise.

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2006(WPMP. NO: 20583 OF 2006) Petition under Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant interim directions directing the 1st respondent to reconsider the case of the petitioner for regularization of his services in the post of Watchman or in any other Class-lV post in the 2nd Respondent pending disposal of the Writ Petition l.A. No: 2 OE2O0{WPUP. llo-34510 oE 2006) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased grant interim directions directing the Respondents to consider the petitioner's case for absorption in any class-lV post existing in the 2nd Respondent, as has been done in respect of Sri Y.Srinivasa Rao as per the orders issued by the 'lst Respondent in G.O.Rt NO. 1401 MA & UD dl7-12-2006, pending disposal of WP 16491 of 2006.

Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl. V.JAGAPATHI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondents:SRl M. SURENDER RAO The Court made the following: ORDER

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL W.P.No.1649L of 2006 oRDER:

l.

When the matter was called on 31.10.2O22, there was no representation on both sides. Hence, this Court directed this matter to be listed on 01.11.2022 under the caption 'for dismissal'. Even today, there is no representation on both sides, though the matter is listed under the caPtion 'for dismissal''

2.

Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. 3.

Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shatl stand dismissed'

SD/- N. RAJ GOPAL ASSISTANT REGIS/RAR .. / sEcTtoN oYrrcen / //TRUE COPY// To,

1. One CC to SRl. V.JAGAPATHI Advocate IOPUC]

2. Two CCs to GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV ,High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

3. One CC to SRl. M.SURENDER RAO Advocate [OPUC]

4. Two CD CoPies.

GB GJP '%-

HIGH COURT 3rATE oF rri\ DATED:01 11112022 \1.

t\$t$ "LSt I -t, + ili t,'$,.

Itr ogrt i1

ORDER

WP.No.16491 of 2006 DISMISSING THE WP FOR NON.PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS.

v