High CourtsSingle Bench(2024) 04 AP CK 0010

Venkataramana Putchakayala, S/O Venkataiah vs State Of Ap, Rep By Its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration,Velagapudi Guntur District And Others

Andhra Pradesh High Court · Decided on 16 April 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No: 6703 Of 2024

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 253 words

Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad, J

1.

Heard Sri MD. Mujubyuddin, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri Prasanth, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Village and Ward Secretariats and Sri Y.V.S.S. Dharaneesh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Kalava Suresh Kumar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent No.3.

2.

Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has placed on record the Endorsement bearing Roc.No.121/S1/2024 dated 08.04.2024 passed by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Kadapa (Respondent No.3). This Proceeding is taken on record. The said Proceeding would indicate that the Writ Petitioner was referred to the Superintendent, Government General Hospital, Kadapa, for thorough examination of the Medical Report submitted by the Writ Petitioner and then to submit a Report. In terms of reference from the Respondent No.3 dated 13.03.2024, the Superintendent, Government General Hospital, Kadapa, vide Letter dated NIL, April, 2024, has furnished a Report to the Respondent No.3 indicating that the medical data submitted by the Writ Petitioner is genuine. The Proceeding of the Respondent No.3 dated 08.04.2022 would also indicate that the Respondent No.3, having considered the Report of the Superintendent, Government General Hospital, Kadapa, has directed the Writ Petitioner to report for duty.

3.

In this view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that since the Writ Petitioner has been directed to report for duty, no further orders would be required from this Court. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No Order as to Costs.

4.

Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of in terms of this Order.