RAVI NATH TILHARI
P. Naga Jasmine – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Ravi Nath Tilhari, J. - Heard Sri K.G. Krishna Murthy, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri Teja Sai, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri K.V. Raghu Veer, learned Govt. Pleader for School Education for respondent Nos. 1 & 2.
2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for the following relief:
"... to issue any writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus to declare the inaction of the Respondent No. 1 in not disposing the Letter vide Lr. Rc. No. ESE02-11021/223/2020, Dt. 03-7-2020 of the respondent No. 2 who brought to the notice of the respondent No. 1 about the petitioner's representation dated 23.05.2020 containing the petitioner's request to extend the benefit of enhancement of petitioner's age of superannuation from 58 to 60 years without considering the same and not disposing the proposals submitted by the Respondent No. 2 mentioned in the same above said letter of the Respondent No. 2, dt. 03.07.2020, stated supra, and the proposal of respondent No. 2 made in letter vide proceedings C. No. 378/A1/APMS/2015, Dt. 22-08-2015 regarding the extension of benefit of enhancement of age of supera
Bijender Singh v. State of Haryana (2005) 3 SCC 685
Harwindra Kumar v. Chief Engineer, Karmik
Jaswant Singh [U.P. Jal Nigam v. Jaswant Singh
Kusumam Hotels (P) Ltd. v. Kerala Seb (2008) 13 SCC 213
Radhey Shyam Gautam [(2007) 11 SCC 507 : (2008) 1 SCC (L & S) 59]
Ramji Purshottam v. Laxmanbhai D. Kurlawala [(2004) 6 SCC 455]
State of U.P. v. Dayanand Chakrawarty (2013) 7 SCC 595
U.P. v. Dinkar Sinha (2007) 10 SCC 548
V. Balasubramaniam v. Tamil Nadu Housing Board (1987) 4 SCC 738
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.