AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
On 03.02.2021, Mr. G. Vidya Sagar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the respondents No.1, 2, 4 and 5 in W.A.No.486 of 2020 had pointed
out how the appellants/writ petitioners have been repeatedly approaching the court for the same relief by filing separate writ petitions. He had stated
that aggrieved by the Memo dated 23. 04.2012, the appellants/writ petitioners had filed W.P.Nos.12827 of 2012 and 13322 of 2012 that were disposed
of by a common order dated 25.11.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge with a direction issued to the respondents to redo the exercise of fixing
seniority of the appellants/writ petitioners and other Assistant Engineers. Thereafter, while the said exercise was still being undertaken by the
respondents, the impugned order came to be passed in W.P.Nos.19264 of 2012 and 23576 of 2012 filed by the appellants/writ petitioners. At that
stage, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellants/writ petitioners had sought time to obtain instructions from his briefing counsel. At his
request, the matters were adjourned to 24.03.2021.
On 24.03.2021, learned counsel for the appellants/writ petitioners had again sought an adjournment which was duly granted and the matters were
adjourned to 09.06.2021. In the meantime, the appellants/writ petitioners were directed to file an affidavit enclosing therewith the reliefs prayed for in
W.P.Nos.12827 of 2012 and 13322 of 2012 along with the orders passed thereon vis-a-vis the relief prayed for in W.P.No.19264 of 2012 for purposes
of comparison. The appellants/writ petitioners were also called upon to explain how they had filed a subsequent writ petition based on the same cause
of action, in the light of the common order dated 25.11.2019 passed in the earlier set of writ petitions filed by them.
On 09.06.2021, learned proxy counsel had appeared for learned counsel for the appellants/writ petitioners and sought accommodation on the ground
that compliance could not be made by filing the affidavit, as directed and the arguing counsel for the appellants was indisposed and unable to appear.
Mr. G. Vidyasagar, learned Senior Counsel had informed the court that learned counsel for the appellants/writ petitioners was hale and healthy and
was appearing virtually before court No.9 on the same day. In view of the aforesaid conduct of learned counsel for the appellants/writ petitioners,
costs of Rs.10,000/- were imposed on him to be deposited with the Telangana Bar Association.
We are informed today that costs of Rs.10,000/- have been deposited with the Telagnana Bar Association on 11.08.2021. Learned counsel for the
appellants/writ petitioners further states that the appellants/writ petitioners have preferred review applications against the common order dated
25.11.2019 passed in W.P.Nos.12827 of 2012 and 13322 of 2012 which are pending before the learned Single Judge. He therefore seeks leave to
withdraw the present appeals.
The present appeals are dismissed as withdrawn along with the pending applications, if any, while cautioning the appellants/writ petitioners and the
learned counsel to be more careful in future as their conduct in the instant case amounts to deliberately misleading the court.