Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35329 (AP)

R. Tulasi Bai v. The Project Director

WP/13429/2011 · 2025-07-03

Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010559642011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 13429/2011 Between: 1. R. TULASI BAI, W/O. R. VENKATESH NAIK HOUSEWIFE R/O. GAJULAPALLI THANDA, NIDIMAMIDI POST, PUTTAPARTHI MANDAL, ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, DISTRICT WOMEN & CHILD WELFARE DEPARTMENT AGENCY, ANANTHAPUR, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. 2. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT DIRECTOR, ICDS. PENUKONDA DIVISION, PENUKONDA, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. 3. L SRAVANI, W/O. L. JANAKI RAM BUGGAPALLI VILLAGE, MIDIMAMIDI POST, PUTTAPARTHI MANDAL, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 1st respondent in issuing Procgs. No. 1248/A/07 dt. 13- 02-2008 appointing the 3rd respondent as Anganwadi Teacher at Gajulapalli Village as arbitrary, unreasonable, improper and contrary to the notification issued on 13-10-2007 and further direct the 1st and 2nd respondent to conduct selections to the Post of Anganwadi Teacher at Gajulapalli Village, Puttaparthi Mandal. IA NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP 16288 OF 2011 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 suspend the proceedings issued by the 1st respondent in No. 1248/A/07 dt. 13-02-2008. 2 IA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 receive the counter copies on record by allowing the leave petition in above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V SREE RANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR WOMEN DEV, CHILD WELFARE The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 13429 of 2011 ORDER: Despite the matter listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there is no representation for the petitioner. It evinces that the petitioner has no interest in prosecuting her case. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date : 04.07.2025 SPP 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Writ Petition No:13429 of 2011 Date : 04.07.2025 SPP