It/ohammed Ghouse v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 ot lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or Direction more pgrticularly one in the nature of writ of lvlandamus, to declare the impugned lntimation Letter Rc.No.Estt/Acctt.1t2O16-17 dt. 4-4-2017 issued by the 4th respondent herein, declaring the petitioner as not eligible for considering me for my appointment in the bank, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and u nconstitutional and consequently set aside the same, and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Honble court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 39357 OF 20171 Petition under Sr.'ction 151 CPC praying that in the ci'cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in s,upport of the petition, the High Courl may be pleased to suspend the impugned intimation letter Rc.No Estt/Acctt.'1l2016-17 issued by the 4th respondent herein, pending disposal of the main Writ Peti ion. lA NO: 1 OF 20'19 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the c 'cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in s;upport of the petition, the High Courl may be pleased to receive the additional rlocuments filing herewith in the above W.P.No.3'1605 of 2017 as additional mat€)rial paper in the interest of iustice anc equity. Counsel for the Petitiorrer: SRI CH.JANARDHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR GENERAL ADMI ,IISTRATION Counsel for the Resporldent No.2: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Resporrdent No.3: GP FOR COOPERATION Counsel for the Resporrdent No.4: SRI R.GURU PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 24486 OF 2019 Between: Mohammed Ghouse, S/o. Dasthagir, Aged about 48 years, Occ.Unemployee, R/o.H.No.5-340, Ilatna Nagar Street, Bangarigadda, Cl- outupall Village and Mandal, Yadadri tlhongir District. (Old Nalgonda District) AND 1 2 The State of Telangana, rep by its Principal Secretary Gr'neral Administration Department, Secretariat Buildings. Hyderabad. The State of Telangana, rep by its Principal Secretary ranchayath Raj and Rural Development (Mdl.ll) Department, Secretariat Build ngs, Hyderabad. ..PETITIONER

3. The Commissione:r, Panchayat Raj and Rural Employeerrent, Urdu Hall lane, Himayathnagar, Flyderabad. t

4. The District Coller;tor, (Pt Wing) Nalgonda, Nalgonda Dis1.ict. 5. The District Co-perative Central Bank Ltd,. Nalgond;r rep by its Chief Executive Officer, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. ..RESPONDENTS qw",. -'// /' Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndra praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue any writ or writs order or direction more particularly one in the nature of wRlT OF MANDAMUS declaring Memo No.57212003-81 (pts) dt. 06-02-2017 is illegal arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and set aside the same and consequently direct the 4th respondent to appoint the petitioner as a Panchayath Secretary under the compassionate grounds of medical invalidatron scheme in the interest of justice ahd equity' lA NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition under section 1 51 CPC prayrng that rn the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petrtion, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 4th Respondent to appoint the petitioner as a Panchayath secretary under the compassionate grounds of medical invalidation scheme' pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI CH.JANARDHAN REDDY CounselfortheRespondentNo.l:GPFoRGENERALADMINISTRATIoN Counsel for the Respondent No.2 to 4: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ Counsel for the Respondent No.5: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER a a a THE HON' BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BTTEE,MAPAKA \A/RIT PETITION No.31605 of 21117 And WRIT PETITION No.24486 of 2019 i I I I COMMON ORDIIR: Writ Petitic,n No. 24486 ol 20 19 is filed chal er-rging the Memo dated 06.02.201 7 issued by Respondenr No. 4-District Collecror as illegal and arbitrary, anrl seeks a direction to respondent \ o.4 kr appoint the petitioner as Panr:hayath Secretary on compassionatc gr.ounds under the medical invalidat ion scheme. And, Writ Petition N r. 3 I 605 of 201 7 challenges the Intimation l,etter Rc.No.Estt/Ac:L ll2Ol6-17 dated 04.04.2017 declar ng the petitioner incligible tbr appoin:rnenr in the bank.

2. The petitioner's father, who was employed r s a Messenger in Respondent No. :j bank, retired on mcdical invalidar ion on I I .08.2001 after sullering palalysis and loss ol sight, with 5 year.:, 6 months, and I 7 days of service leti. The petitioner applied lor compas: ionatc appointment on 14. 11.2000 and subsequently on 04.11.2008 anrl 01.06.2015 under G.O.Ms.No.66t tdated 23.10.2008) rvhich revived rhe compassionare appointment scherre for dependents of medically invr lidated employees. Despite fulfilling the eligibility crireria, the petition:r's requests were rejected without reasons, leading to these petitions.

3. lJeard Mr. Ch. Janardhan Reddy, leamed couns,,l for the petitioner (in both petitions); leamed Govern .,.n, plea lc.r fbr General Administration (Itespondent No. I ), learned Gover. rment pleader lor Panchayath Raj and Rural Development (Respondent No. 2 in W.p. No. 2 1 wp_31605_2017 & wp 24486,2079 NBK, ] 24486 of 2019); leamed Govemment Pleader for Cooperation (Respondent No.2 in W.P. No.31605 of 2017);Mr. R. Guru Prasad, learned counsel for Respondent No. 4 in W.P. No. 3 I 605 of 2017.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner's father retired on medical invalidation with more than five years of service remaining, meeting the criteria under G.O.Ms.No.66l. The petitioner made multiple representations which were either ignored or rejected without valid grounds, despite a priol court order directing consideration. The petitioner is qualified with a B.Com degree and computer knowledge, and thus entitled to compassionate appointmcnt as per the rules. The rejection letters and memos are illegal and arbitrary.

5. Leamed counsel for respondent No. 4, based on the counter affidavit, contends that under amended Section I l5-D (2)(iv) of the TSCS Act, the bank has autonomy over staffing. According to G.O.Ms.No.661, compassionate appointments must be in the same unit where the employee worked and are limited to cases with five years of leftover service counted from retirement order date, and compassionate appointments are capped at 5%o of direct recruitment vacancies.

6. Having considered the respective contentions and perused the record, it is to be noted at the outset that it remained unrebutted contention of the petitioner that his father had a service of over five years left as on the date of his retirement on I1.08.2001, fulfilling the key condition under G.O.Ms.No.661 for compassionate appointment. The petitioner's multiple :-t' a .---a ---"' -/ I I I 3 rvp 31605_2017 & \\p 24486 2019 NBK,I applications were rlot considered properly, and the reje,rtion rnerno dated 06.02.2017 failed to provide reasons. Respondent No 4's o\\,n counter adrnitted the leftor er service eligibility. The scheme \ ,. s scraped in 2002 and rer,ived late r in 2008. The District Colle:tor, r,ide letter No.Estt/Acctt. 1|fi.21612000-2001 dared 04.11.2001 addr:ssed ro the chief Secretar), placed the details with regard to the Applicarior submined by Sri Shaik Dastagir, Messenger, wherein it is stated as follou r: "Sri Shaik Oastagir, Messenge. of the Nalgonda District Co_operativ,.Central Bank has applied for retirement on Medical lnvalidation on 14.11.2000. The inc vidual was having left over service ol 5 years 4 months at the time of issue of n:dical invalidatio; certificate. But ther€! was some administrative delay in processing t re file, resulting in shortfall in the leftc,ver service. The details of the case, from date of application for retirement on medical invalidation, is formulated here under: Date of submission of application Date of PIC resolution Date of Medical lnvalidation Date of proposal to DM & HO Date of clearance of fire by DM & HO Date of submission to the Oistrict Collector

14.11-2000 '14.12.2000 05.0't.200,1 01.02.2001 19.04.2001 30.04.2001 Leftover service 5 years 6 months 17 days 5 years 5 months 17 days 5 years 4 months 25 days 5 years 3 months 30 days 5 years 1 month 12 days 5 years 1 month I day Personal appearance lly the individual Before District Level (:ommittee

14.06.2001 4 years 11 months 17 days Date of proceedings by the District Collector Date of PIC committee meeting Date of retirement orde. I f

15.06.2001 4 years 11 months 12 days

31.07.2001 4 years 10 months

11.08.2001 4 years 9 months 20 days Therefore, the C-hief Secretary is requested to relax the 5 years leftover service condition in respect of Sri_Shaik Dastagi., Messenger (Retired undei Medical Invrlidation) of District Cooperative Cent.al Bank Ltd., Nalgonda to appoint his son urder compassionate grounds-" I I

7. A perusal ofthe above letter dated 04. ll.200l adlressed by the 4ft respondenrDistrict collector would show that there v as administrative 4 wp 31605 2017 & wp 24486_20t9 NBK,I delay on the part of respondent-authorities in processing the file of the petitioner. The petitioner cannot be put to disadvantage for the administrative delays on the part ol respondcnts. The compassionate application was of the year 2001. We are now in 2025. The petitioner's father having live years of service remaining as on the date of his retirement on medical invalidation, and the scheme being in force as on the date of application by the petitioner', the impugned rejection of the petitioner's candidature is not sustainable. The respondent-authorities having not processed an eligible file within time, cannot now seek to raise any ground to the disadvantagc of the petitioner, when admittedly there was no delay on the part of the pctitioner, and the petitioner was eligible for appointment under the scheme, and the scheme was in force. In that view of the matter, the writ petitions deserve to be allowed.

8. Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed with direction to Respondent No.4-District Collector to forthwith appoint the petitioner as Panchayat Secretary. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, ifany, shall stand closed. i 1 .l To, //TRUE COPY// 1 The Princioal Secretary, General Administratio Buildings, Hyderabad, State of Telangana SD .P. PONNA KRISHNA S ISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER Department, Secretariat

2. The Principal secretary Panchayath Raj and^ Rural Development (Mdl ll) ' ffi ,il;"-t-Seiietariat' Buildings,' Hydera6ad' State of Telan ga na 3. The Commissioner, Panchayat Ra.i and Rural Employeement' Urdu Hall lane' - HimaYathnagar' HYderabad'

4. The District Collector, (Pt Wing) Nalgonda' Nalgonda District' 5. The District Collector, Nalgonda District' Nalgonda' 5. The District Co-Operative Offrcer' Nalgonda District' Nalgonda' I t- -.,=ur& ------t.:."*'/ ,/ /

7. The Chief Executive officer. District co-operativr central Bank Ltd, Nalgonda. Nalg:nda District. B One CC to SRI CH.JANARDHAN REDDY' Advocate [C PUC] 9. One CC to SRI R GURU PRASAD, Advocate [OPUC] '10Two CCs to GF' FOR COOPERATION, High Court for he State of Telangana at Hyderabad [{)UT]

11.Two CCs to G) FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OLT] 12 fwo CCs to GF'} FOR GENERAL ADMINISTRATION' llrgh Court for the State of Telangana at HYderabad [OUT] 13 Two CCs to GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ' High ( ourt for the State of Telangana at l-lYderabad [OUT] I '14 Two CD CoPie; BSR HIGH COURT NBKJ DATED: 0410712025 I I COMMON ORDER WP.No.31605 of 2017 AND WP.No.24486 of 2019 :.::. ( 'i ii SEP 2025 .. I I ALLOWING BOTH THE WRIT PETITIOIIS, WITHOUT COSTS 9n ]u' 11