Smt. Tulsi Bai v. State Bank Of Hyderabad, Rep.By Regional Manager.

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY ,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF NOVEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI WRIT PETITION NO: 14793 OF 2003 Between:

1. Smt. Tulsi Bai, (died) per LR Petitioner No. 2

2. Yada Rao, S/o. Vittal, aged about 50 years, Rl/o.Narayankhed (V) & (M), Medak District.

(Petitioner No. 2 is brought on record as LR of deceased Petitioner No. 1 as per Court Order dt. 18/4/09 in WPMP. 3171109.) ...PETITIONER AND

1. The Regional Manager, State Bank of Hyderabad, Region lll, Zonal Office, Secunderabad.

2. The Branch Manager, State Bank of Hyderabad, Narayankhed Branch, Narayankhed, Medak District.

...RESPONOENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe 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 and more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF TMANDAMUS by directing the Respondents to arrange the payments of the difference of pay and allowance from the date of appointment to the category of Sweeper, by declaring the Petitioner aS Sweeper as she is entitled for full wages aS Sweeper from 01- 1 0-1993.

WPMP. NO: 18328 OF 2003 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 to expedite the date of hearing in view of the attaining the age of superannuation on 30-09-2003 Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl. SAI PATIL (NOT PRESENT) Counsel for the Respondents: SRI.A. KRISHNAM RAJU The Court made the following:

THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI W.P. No.L4793 of 2003 ORDER:

On the earlier occasion, there was no representation for the petitioner and therefore, the matter was directed to be listed under the caPtion ufor dismissal"'

Today also, even though the matter is listed under caption "for dismissal", when the matter is taken up for hearing' none appeared for the Petitioner.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed for nonprosecution. No order as to costs' Miscellaneous petitions' if any, pending in this writ petition shall also stand dismissed' SD/.T.JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY// \ SECTION OFFI CER To

1. One CC to Sri. Sai Patil, Advocate IOPUC] z dni cc to sri. A Krishnam Raju, Advocate [OPUC]

3. Two CD CoPies.

4. One SPare CoPY.

PI\/ t\\x

HIGH COURT DATED:16/11/2021 \ [r,- srAr6 Q^l (>'\

ORDER

:z \\ f, U 10 DEc$tl WP.No.14793 of 2003 .,..t . '/ "..: '' i..: r- " --t' -- ---:-,.-aet..o- '

Dismissing the WP For non-prosecution Without costs.

(s )0*'

t{>-