Heard Learned Counsel Appearing ... vs Unknown
2023 Latest Caselaw 3563 AP

         HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE No:.W.A.Nos.657, 659, 660, 661, 666, 667 & 673 of 2023
                      PROCEEDING SHEET
SL.     DATE                         ORDER                              OFFICE
NO.                                                                      NOTE
      19.07.2023 DVSS, J & DVR,J
                      I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.A.No.657 of 2023
                                          &
                                  I.A.No.2 of 2023
                                         in
                  W.A.Nos. 659, 660, 661, 666, 667 & 673 of 2023


                       Heard learned counsel appearing the
                 appellants and learned Standing Counsel for
                 the APPSC.
                       All the applicants seeking leave are
                 selected for the post of Assistant Conservator
                 of Forest under the Notification No.4 of 2022
                 dated 18.04.2022. The process of selection and
                 appointment is still to be completed. In the
                 interregnum period, the writ petition was filed
                 and the notification itself was set aside by the
                 learned Single Judge. Assailing the same,
                 these writ appeals have been filed with an
                 application for leave.
                       Learned    counsel    for     the   appellants
                 submits that they have undergone process of
                 examination and selection and if the order is
                 allowed, to stand        their future would be
                 affected. It is pointed out that the successful
                 candidates were not made respondents, when

the writ petitioner was heard. Therefore, they seek leave.

Learned counsel for the respondent SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE NO. NOTE Nos.2 and 3 submit that they have also filed an appeal questioning the said order and they do not strongly oppose the application for leave.

Learned counsel for respondent No.1 vehemently oppose the application and states that as constitutional provisions are violated there is nothing wrong in the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge.

He admits that the appellants seeking leave were not made respondents in the writ petition.

Considering all the above submissions, this Court is of the opinion that the application for leave should be allowed since in the opinion of this Court, the applicants have to be heard in the appeal. Their rights/claims have to be examined.

Accordingly, these interlocutory applications are allowed.

_______ DVSS,J

______ DVR,J I.A.No.2 of 2023 in W.A.No.657 of 2023 & I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.A.Nos. 659, 660, 661, 666, 667 & 673 of 2023

These applications are filed to dispense with the filing of Certified Copy of the Order in W.P.No.11727 of 2022, dated 28.04.2023.

 SL.   DATE                         ORDER                           OFFICE
NO.                                                                 NOTE

As the certified copy of the order is already in the Court record in other cases, these applications are allowed.

_______ DVSS,J

______ DVR,J

I.A.No.3 of 2023 in W.A.Nos. 659, 660, 661, 666, 667 & 673 of 2023

These interlocutory applications are filed to condone the delay in filing the appeals.

After considering the submissions made and contents of the affidavit, this Court is of the opinion that sufficient cause is made out to condone the delay in filing of appeals.

Hence, this Interlocutory Applications are allowed.

_______ DVSS,J

______ DVR,J

W.A.Nos.657, 659, 660, 661, 666, 667 & 673 of 2023

List along with W.A.No.725 of 2023 on 24.07.2023 _______ DVSS,J

______ DVR,J AG/ANS