NALLU INDRASENA REDDY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 28.1.2014 on receipt of the application (P.I.L. M.P. No.10 of 2014) to receive certain documents as additional material papers to this matter, we passed an order directing that the affected party may file counter affidavit to the said application. It appears in this matter the affected party would have been Dr. M. Mohan Babu, fourth respondent. He has not filed any affidavit to the application.

(2.) Mr. L. Srinivas Rao, learned Advocate, appears and asked for extension of time to file an affidavit. On closer scrutiny of the record, we noticed that said Srinivas Rao has not been engaged by fourth respondent, and one Mr. V. Krishna Mohan has been engaged as Advocate to represent him. He is not present. Though the name of Mr. L. Srinivas Rao has been mentioned as an Advocate in the counters filed in the main matter, on scrutiny of the Vakalatnama, we find that no Vakalatnama has been filed in his name authorizing to do anything in this matter. In the circumstances, his prayer is absolutely unauthorized.

(3.) We record that there is no appearance for fourth respondent. We, therefore, conclude that he is not willing to file any affidavit to the application filed by the petitioner to receive the additional documents and not to contest this application either. P.I.L.M.P. No.10 of 2014 is accordingly allowed.