Telangana State Road Transport ... vs S.Yaka Laxmi
2025 Latest Caselaw 2195 Tel

Telangana High Court

Telangana State Road Transport ... vs S.Yaka Laxmi on 14 February, 2025

       THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA
                           AND
        THE HON'BLE JUSTICE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO

                          M.A.C.M.A.No.94 of 2023


Mr. N.Chandra Sekhar, learned Standing Counsel for TSRTC for the appellant.



JUDGMENT:

The proof of service filed by the appellant does not indicate which

respondent has been served and which respondent has not been

served. There are six respondents in the cause title. The postal track

report shows "Item Delivered (Sender)" that is to an unspecified

respondent on 12.02.2025 but also shows "Item Returned Insufficient

Address" on 10.02.2025. There are several postal track reports which

further confuse the fact of service to the respondents.

2. The present Appeal is of 2023 and the appellant was directed to

serve notice to the respondents both by personal service as well as by

Court process by a Co-ordinate Bench on 24.01.2023. The appellant

was also directed to file proof of service. The appellant was thereafter

given liberty of issuing fresh notice on 13.03.2023 as well as personal

service and was again directed to file proof of service. The appellant did

not take any steps for listing or hearing of the matter from 13.03.2023

till 28.01.2025 i.e., almost three years and even thereafter remained

unrepresented on at least one occasion.

3. It is evident from the submissions made by learned counsel

appearing for the appellant that counsel does not have sufficient

instructions from the appellant. This would be evident from the docket

orders dated 04.02.2025, 05.02.2025 and 12.02.2025.

4. The appellant was given several opportunities to explain

service/non-service to the respondents and file proof of the same. The

appellant was however unable to do so despite sufficient time being

given. We are accordingly of the view that the petitioner has not shown

any diligence in proceeding with the matter.

5. M.A.C.M.A.No.94 of 2023 is accordingly dismissed. Interim

orders, if any, shall stand vacated and all connected applications are

disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

__________________________________ MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, J

_____________________________ B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO, J

Date: 14.02.2025 VSU