P.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Vs. STATE OF A.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As both these writ petitions have been filed by the same petitioner and raise the same issues, they are being disposed of, by way of this common order.

(2.) The 2nd respondent-Corporation had issued a notification vide proceedings in Rc.No.9421/2007/Legal Cell/C6, dtd. 9/1/2021, calling for applications for being empanelled as counsels for 8 zones of the 2nd respondentCorporation. One of the eligibility criteria was that, the applicant should have a minimum experience of 10 years at the bar and should not have crossed the age of 60 years.

(3.) The petitioner, who is a practicing advocate at Visakhapatnam has challenged the said criteria, by way of W.P.No.4320 of 2021. While the said petition was pending, the respondent again issued a fresh notification, Rc.No.9421/2007/LEGAL CELL, with the same conditions and criteria on 8/7/2022. In view of the fresh notification, the petitioner has again approached this Court, by way of W.P.No.2598 of 2022.