K.V.G. PRASAD, KRISHNA DT. v. V.C & M.D., HYD & 3 OT
WP/15817/2012 · 2025-01-22
Harinath N
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 37873 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 37873 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 15817 OF 2012 Between: K.V.G. Prasad. Un-employee, S/o Sambasiva Rao, Aged 31 Vijayawada (P &M), Krishna Dist. years, R/o ...PETITIONER AND
1. The APSRTC, Musheerabad, Hyderabad.
2. The APSRTC Krishna.
3. The APSRTC. rep. by its Executive Director, O/o RM. Vijayawada Krishan Dist. rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, rep. by its Regional Manager, Krishna Region At
4. The APSRTC rep. by its Works Manager, Zonal Workshop Vidyadharapuram, Vijayawada, Krishna District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not according the age relaxation to the petitioner for recruitment to the post of Shramik in pursuance of the Notification No. 23.12.2011, as relaxed i R3/684(23)/2011-HRD dt. in pursuance of the Govt, orders, as illegal, unjust and arbitrary, and violative of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of
India and as such direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner by giving age relaxation forthwith.
LA. NO: 1 OF 2012(WPMP. NO: 20395 OF 2012) Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner in the selections to the post of Shramik in pursuance of the Notification No. R3/684(23)/2011-HRD dt. 23.12.2011, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S M SUBHAN Counsel for the Respondents: SRI K SATYANARAYAN MURTHY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following: ORDER
APHC010671692012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 15817/2012 Between: ...PETITIONER K.v.g. Prasad, Krishna Dt. AND ...RESPONDENT(S) V C M D Hyd 3 Ot and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.SMSUBHAN Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1 .K SATYANARAYAN MURTHY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following:
2
ORDER: The petitioner is challenging the inaction on the part of the respondents in not according the age relaxation to the petitioner for considering his requirement to the post of Shramik, in pursuance of notification dated
23.12.2011. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was working on a casual basis and had completed an ITI in Diesel Mechanic Trade. The petitioner also underwent an apprenticeship for a period of two (2) years. It is further submitted that the petitioner had crossed the prescribed age limit for recruitment as an apprentice and that the respondents ought to have relaxed the age restriction, keeping in view the petitioner’s apprenticeship with the respondent corporation. On 05.06.2012, this Court directed the respondents to receive the petitioner’s application if he seeks the benefit of age relaxation under G.O.Ms.No.1, dated 02.01.2012, and to subject him to the selection process, pending further orders. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that, in compliance with the orders of this Court vide proceedings dated 01.06.2012, the respondents called upon the petitioner to attend for interview. However, it is stated in the said proceedings that the petitioner was absent for the interview, which was conducted on 23.05.2012.
2.
3.
4.
5. Recording the said proceedings, nothing further is required to be adjudicated on merits.
3
6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no orders as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
//TRUE COPY// SE To, OFFICER
1. One CC to Sri S M Subhan Advocate [OPUC] [o"puq ^ Satyanarayan Murthy (SC for APSRTC) Advocate
3. Three CD Copies TF
sc® HIGH COURT DATED:22/01/2025 I 03 MAR 2025 i Curraiii MciHHi . ^
ORDER WP.No.15817of 2012 DISMISSING THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS