Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 28548 (AP)

THAVVA OBUL REDDY @ TAVVA YERRAIAHGARI OBUL REDDY v. S RAMTHULLA & 2 OTHERS

CRP/5908/2017 · 2026-03-30

Maheswara Rao Kuncheam

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010329162016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 20231/2016 Between: 1. KODALI GAYATRI, W/O CH.R.V.V.PRASAD,, D.NO:54-4-42/1, SIVALAYAM BACK STREET, ISUKATHOTA, VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH 530022. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DREDGING CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, DREDGE HOUSE, PORT AREA, VISAKHAPATNAM-530001. 2. THE DREDGING CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (H.R.), DREDGE HOUSE, PORT AREA, VISAKHAPATNAM-530001. ...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 toto issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the Advertisement No:02/2016, dated 03.04.2016 by stipulating the age limit as 30 years to the post of Superintendent (Secretarial Services) under direct recruitment as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural justice and contrary to Rule 3 of the Recruitment Rules of the respondents-Coproration and in violation of the Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, to quash the same by directing the respondents to issue the Advertisement afresh in consonance with Rule 3 of the Recruitment Rules of the respondents-Corporation IA NO: 1 OF 2016(WVMP 3452 OF 2016 2 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 vacate the order dated 23-6-2016 in WPMP.24834 of 2016 in W.P.No.20231 of 2016 in the interest of justice, and puss IA NO: 2 OF 2016(WPMP 24834 OF 2016 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 direct the respondents to receive the hard copy of the application of the petitioner for the post of Superintendent (Secretarial Services) along with the requisite fee and issue the hall ticket thereto, to participate in the competitive examination to be held in this regard pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G U R C PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. 2. G RAMA GOPAL The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 20231/2016 The instant Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following prayer: “...to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the Advertisement No:02/2016, dated 03.04.2016 by stipulating the age limit as 30 years to the post of Superintendent (Secretarial Services) under direct recruitment as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural justice and contrary to Rule 3 of the Recruitment Rules of the respondents-Corporation and in violation of the Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, to quash the same by directing the respondents to issue the Advertisement afresh in consonance with Rule 3 of the Recruitment Rules of the respondents-Corporation and pass...” 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri G. U. R. C. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner appeared through virtual mode and submitted that in view of the subsequent events taken place in the list, cause in the present writ petition does not survive and accordingly, he seeks permission to close the Writ Petition, for which, Sri G. Ram Gopal, learned counsel who is appearing on behalf of the respondent has not raised any objection. 3. Accordingly, recording the same, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Civil Revision Petition shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 31.03.2026 ARB 5 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 20231/2016 Date: 31.03.2026 ARB