CH. K. ABNEZAR & 8 ORS. v. C.M., SYNDICATE BANK, KARNATAKA STATE & ANO.
WP/1536/2014 · 2025-03-12
Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 32297 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 32297 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010477762014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 1536/2014 Between: Ch. K. Abnezar & 8 Ors. and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND C M Syndicate Bank Karnataka State Ano and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. GUTTAPALEM VIJAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. PILLIX LAW FIRM
2. A KRISHNAM RAJU
2
The Court made the following order:-
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the following relief/s:-
“…to issue Writ, Order or Direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent in not considering the candidature of the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Law and consequently direct the Respondents to permit the petitioners in participating the selection process held on 25.01.2014 for the post of Armed Guards at 2nd Respondent Region and pass such other order or orders.…”
2. On perusal of the affidavit, it appears that interim relief and main relief is one and the same. This Court by an order dated 23.01.2014, directed the 2nd respondent to consider the candidature of the petitioners along with others for recruitment to the post of Armed Guards. By virtue of interim orders, this Court has conclusively granted a final relief in favour of the petitioner. Thereby, leaving nothing for adjudication thereof.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the respondents have not conducted selection process for the Armed Guards.
4. It is a separate cause of action.
3
5. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, if at all, the respondents are intended to conduct any selection process for the Armed Guards, they are directed to consider the case of the petitioners, subject to their eligibility. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHARA RAO Date: 12.03.2025
KBN
4 101 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHARA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.1536 of 2014
Date: 12.03.2025
KBN