B.RAMLA NAIK Vs. J.SRINIVAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri P.V.Krishnaiah, learned counsel for the Appellant.

(2.) The Writ Appeal was listed in the Forenoon session and Sri G.Raju, learned Advocate is represented on behalf of Sri P.V.Krishnaiah, learned Counsel for the Appellant. The learned Counsel Sri G.Raju and the learned Counsel for the respondents were heard in the Forenoon session and the Court made it clear to the learned Counsel that the Writ Appeal was not maintainable as the Appellant had no locus standi to question the interim order granted by the learned Single Judge of this Court in a petition preferred by the Respondent impugning the order of the Disciplinary Authority.

(3.) At this juncture, the learned Counsel sought time and this Court put the learned Counsel on notice stating that it had no objection for granting time and hearing the petition further, but in the event the Appellant is unable to convince this Court with regard to the locus standi of the Petitioner to impugn the interim order granted by this Court, the Appeal would be dismissed by imposing exemplary costs. Despite the same, the Counsel had sought for passing over the matter.