B.Sunitha vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

Final Order
Court:High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Judge:Hon'ble Arup Kumar Goswami
Case Status:Dismissed
Order Date:8 Oct 2021
CNR:APHC010293672021

AI Summary

Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order

Order Issued After Hearing

Purpose:

Disposed

Before:

Hon'ble Arup Kumar Goswami , Ninala Jayasurya

Listed On:

8 Oct 2021

Original Order Copy

Get a certified copy of this order

Download True Copy

Order Text

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE

&

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

W.A. No. 542 of 2021

(Taken up through video conferencing)

B. Sunitha D/o. B. Prabhakar Rao, Aged about 33 years, Occ: Pvt. Teacher, R/o. H.No.4-21A, Devanagaram village, Chinacumbam post, Cumbam Mandal, Prakasam District – 523 333 and others. .. Appellants

Versus

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, School Education Department, A.P. Amaravathi, and another. .. Respondents

Counsel for the appellants : Mr. T. Koteswara Prasad

Counsel for respondents : Mr. K. Bheema Rao

ORAL JUDGMENT

Dt: 08.10.2021

(per Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ)

Heard Mr. T. Koteswara Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/writ petitioners. Also heard Mr. K. Bheema Rao, learned Government Pleader for Services-III, appearing for the respondents.

  1. This writ appeal is preferred against an order dated 27.07.2021, whereby the learned single Judge expressed the opinion that no case was made out for suspending the G.O.Ms.No.39 School Education (Exams) Department, dated 21.06.2021 by way of an interim order. By the aforesaid order, the learned single Judge also directed the case to be listed for instructions and counter on 24.08.2021.

  2. In the Writ Appeal a counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondents.

  3. Having regard to the statements made in the affidavit that the appellants/petitioners do not come under the zone of consideration as per their merit, we are of the opinion that no interference is called for with the order under challenge. We, however, hasten to add that we have not expressed any conclusive opinion on such statement. We say no more, because any other observation by us may cause prejudice to either of the parties before the learned single Judge.

  4. Accordingly, the writ appeal is disposed of. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand closed.

ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CJ NINALA JAYASURYA, J

GM

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE

&

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

W.A. No. 542 of 2021

(per Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ)

Dt: 08.10.2021

GM

Share This Order

Case History of Orders

Order(6) - 8 Oct 2021

Final Order

Viewing

Order(5) - 5 Oct 2021

Interim Order

Click to view

Order(4) - 30 Sept 2021

Interim Order

Click to view

Order(3) - 17 Sept 2021

Interim Order

Click to view

Order(2) - 11 Sept 2021

Interim Order

Click to view

Order(1) - 1 Sept 2021

Interim Order

Click to view