https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172400 The Court allowed Civil Appeal No. 2826 of 1977 and Civil Appeal No. 278 of 1978, quashing the orders of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. It was held that the jurisdiction over the High Court staff and subordinate judiciary remains exclusively with the Chief Justice and the High Court, as per Articles 229 and 235, respectively. The respondents were advised to challenge their premature retirement orders through writ petitions in the High Court, which would be heard on merits without objections on grounds of delay or laches. en-us Tue, 12 Sep 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Oct 2022 10:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172400 The Court allowed Civil Appeal No. 2826 of 1977 and Civil Appeal No. 278 of 1978, quashing the orders of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. It was held that the jurisdiction over the High Court staff and subordinate judiciary remains exclusively with the Chief Justice and the High Court, as per Articles 229 and 235, respectively. The respondents were advised to challenge their premature retirement orders through writ petitions in the High Court, which would be heard on merits without objections on grounds of delay or laches. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 12 Sep 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172400