Supreme Court - Daily Orders
The State Of Andhra Pradesh vs T. Lakshmi Rambabu on 12 July, 2022
Bench: D.Y. Chandrachud, A.S. Bopanna
1
ITEM NO.12 COURT NO.4 SECTION XII-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).10133/2022
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 23-09-2021
in WA No. 397/2021 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at
Amravati)
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
T. LAKSHMI RAMBABU & ORS. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.80819/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING
C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT)
Date : 12-07-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Mahfooz Ahsan Nazki, AOR
Mr. Polanki Gowtham, Adv.
Mr. Shaik Mohamad Haneef, Adv.
Mr. T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, Adv.
Mr. K.V. Girish Chowdary, Adv.
Ms. Rajeswari Mukherjee, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. A.D.N. Rao, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Annam Venkatesh, AOR
Mr. Rahul Mishra, Adv.
Mr. D. Shiva Shankar, Adv.
Ms. Agrimaa Singh, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1 There was a gross delay on the part of the State of Andhra Pradesh in the present case. The original order of the High Court dated 28 December 2016 has Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Sanjay Kumar Date: 2022.07.12 not been challenged until date. A review was sought of that order on 1 October 17:17:01 IST Reason:
2019, which was dismissed on 24 March 2021. The order dismissing the review was not amenable to a writ appeal in any event. Hence, we decline to entertain 2 the Special Leave Petition. However, it is expressly clarified that no opinion has been expressed by the Court on the question of law which is kept open to be decided in appropriate proceedings.
2 The Special Leave Petition is dismissed.
3 Mr A D N Rao, senior counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent, states that the first respondent retired in 2017 and his dues have not yet been paid despite the lapse of nearly five years. Senior counsel submits that the State may be directed to comply and pay the retiral dues of the first respondent in a reasonable period in which event the first respondent will not press the contempt proceedings.
4 We direct the State of Andhra Pradesh to release the entire dues of the first respondent within a period of two months from the date of this order. 5 Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
(SANJAY KUMAR-I) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR)
DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURT MASTER