Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 43430 (AP)

M.Anand Naik @M.A,Naik, v. The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

WP/12567/2019 · 2025-08-11

B V L N Chakravarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

I ' ! O: > APHC010273072019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION NO: 12567 OF 2019 Between: M.Anand Naik @M.A,Naik,, S/o Soma Naik, Aged about 40 years, E.No.947728, Contract Conductor, Gundle Guttajhanda Sarimedugu (Post) Gurrainkonda (Mandal) Chittoor District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Rep.by its Managing Director, Vijayawada, Krishna District. The Depot Manager, APSRTC. Alipiri Depot Tirupati, Chittoor District. The Dy Chief Traffic Manager, APSRTC Tirupathi, Chittoor District. The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Tirupati, Chittoor District. The Chairperson cum Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Anantapuramu. 2. 3. 4. 5. ...Respondents 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 a Writ or Direction or an Order which particularlyin the nature of WRIT OF CERTIORARI calling for the records pertaining to the ID No. 100 of 2014 dated 30-6-2017 on the file of the Chairperson cum Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court Anantapuramu and set aside the same / in ^6 far, as it went against the petitioner in terminating the services of the r ■ petitioner order dated 25-1-20-13 by the respondent as -illegal, arbitrary . and contrary to the evidence on record and consequently direct the Respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BHASKAR GANDHAM Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5: SRI VINOD KUMAR TARLADA (SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following order: APHC010273072019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE [3368] PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION NO: 12567/2019 Between: 1.M.ANAND NAIK @MANAIK,, S/0 SOMA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, E.N0.947728, CONTRACT CONDUCTOR, GUNDLE GUTTA,THANDA SARIMEDUGU (POST) GURRAINKONDA (MANDAL) CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2.THE DEPOT MANAGER, APSRTC. ALIPIRI DEPOT TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3.THE DY CHIEF TRAFFIC MANAGER, APSRTC TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4.THE REGIONAL MANAGER, APSRTC, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 5.THE CHAIRPERSONCUMPRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, ANANTAPURAMU ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.BHASKAR GANDHAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VINOD KUMAR TARLADA (SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following: 2 <<■ THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No.12567 OF 20119 ( ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: •‘....to issue a Writ or Direction or an Order which particularly in the nature of WRIT OF CERTIORARI calling for the records pertaining to the I.D No. 100 of 2014 dated 30-6- 2017 on the file of the Chairperson cum Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court Anantapuramu and set aside the same in so far as it went against the petitioner in terminating the services of the petitioner order dated 25-1- 2013 by the 2nd respondent as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the evidence on record and consequently direct the Respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service and pass...” 2. None appeared for the writ petitioner, though the matter is posted under the caption for dismissal. There was no representation for the petitioner today, as well as on the previous adjournment. 3. Learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents/APSRTC is in attendance. 4. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. 3 As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. One CC to Sri. Bhaskar Gandham, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri. Vinod Kumar Tarlada (SC FOR APSRTC), Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies. 2. 3. AL HIGH COURT DATED:12/08/2025 ORDER WP NO. 12567 OF 2019 g I3 0CT2D25 m{ . ^ Current Section DISMISSING THE W.P. FOR NON PROSECUTION, WITHOUT COSTS