SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(AP) 1112

S.R.NAYAK, DUBAGUNTA SUBRAHMANYAM
B. G. V. Giridhar – Appellant
Versus
Ramakrishna Rao – Respondent


S. R. NAYAK, J.

( 1 ) ALL these writ appeals are directed against the same order of the learned single Judge dated 10. 7. 2002 in WP No. 9085 of 2002. WA No. 1169 of 2002 is by one Dr. B. G. V. Giridhar, the 3rd respondent in the writ petition; WA no. 1180 of 2002 is by N. T. R. University of health Sciences, the 2nd respondent in the writ petition; and WA No. 1495 of 2002 is by State Government of Andhra Pradesh, the 1st respondent in the writ petition. The 1st respondent in these appeals, namely. Dr. Ch. Ramakrishna Rao filed the above writ petition praying for the following relief:"petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus (i) by declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the MD qualification for selection to the post of DM (Neurology) as wholly illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of Article 14 of Constitution of India; (ii) declare that regulation 7 (f) of 2nd respondent university is contrary to Section 3 of Act 5 of 1983 and rules made there












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top