Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

SAKTI THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR, RAMPACHODAVARAM, EAST GODA VARI DISTT., ANDHRA PRADESH versus R.K. RAGALA AND ORS.

Decided
6 November 1995
Judges listed
K. RAMASWAMY, B.N. KIRPAL (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Disposed off

Citations

Official
[1995] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 795 · 1995 INSC 695

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

Permission lo file S.L.P. is granted. Leave granted.·

p. 796, margin A

Since the first r c>nondent now stands retired from service, no useful purpose will be served ~o continue the proceedings pursuant lo the show cause notice which w;,s quashed by the High Court. No doubt the High Court was not justified in exercising its power to nip the action in the bud at the notice stage itself. As regards the law, recently this Court has considered the controversy and laid the law in Kumari Madhuri Patil v. Additional Commissioner, [1994] 6 SCC 241 and Director of Tribal Welfare, Government of A.P. v. Laveti Gi1i & Alli'., JT (1995) 3 SC 684. The ratio of the High Court decision is no longer good law.

p. 796, margin B

Under these circumstances, we think that no useful purpose will be served to continue the proceedings. However, if the children of the first respondent lay any claim on the basis that they are Scheduled Tribes, it would be open to the appropriate authorities to take appropriate decision or action as is warranted under law.

p. 796, margin D

The appeal is disposed of with the above observations. R.P. Appeal disposed of.

p. 796, margin E