High Court · 2025

PetitionunderArticle226ollheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction preferably one in the nature ofwritofmandamusdeclaringtheactionoftherespondentsland2inamending the bye laws of the 3rd respondent vide G'O'Ms No 44' dated 31'01 2009 contrary to G.o.Ms.No.264' dated 22,06.2001 as illegal improper, null and void and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to verify the membership and bye laws of the 3rd respondent and approve to conduct elections' l.A. NO: I OF 2011(WPMP. NO: 10617 oF 2011) PetitionunderSectionlslCPcprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, ttie High Court may be pleased to operation of G.O.Ms.No.634, dated 21'08'1969 suspend the dated 31 .01 .2009 of General Administration as well (Service AS c) G.O.Ms.No.44, Department as the 3rd respondent is not having any original bye laws approved by Government, pending disposal of the main writ petition. l.A. NO: 2OF 2011(WPM P. NO: 10618 oF 2011 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the respondents 'r and 2 not to entertain the 3rd respondent Union / Association in the capacity of recognized ti, their Bye-raws are approved by Government of Andhra Pradesh, pending disposal of the main writ petition. l.A. NO: 3 OF 201 M P. NO:1 0619 0F 20111 Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to verify the Membership of the 3rd respondent and conduct elections, pending disposal of the main writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner: SRI M.V.S.SAI KUMAR counser for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2, cp ;dil';ENERAL ADMrNrsrRATloN Counset for the Respondents: SRt n|.SUnefrf Jih-niO The Court made the following: ORDER ?&&iiot- n! HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN trIRIT PETITION No. 8543 oT 2OLL ORDER: Heard Sri M.V.S.Sai Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for General Administration and Sri Mad'iraju Srinivasa Rao' learned counsel for respondent No'3' Perused the record'

2. Petitioner is a registered Association representing Non- GazettedofficersofentireTelanganaoritsmembers. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner' there are two thousand Non-Gazetted Offrcers as members of petitioner's Association as on todaY. ResPondent No'3 is Officers Association' It is also continuing as Non-Gazetted admitted that there a::e Gaz'etted Officers in its Association' The same is contrar5r to the bye-laws of respondent No'3 - Association. Without considering the sarne' vide G.O.Ms.No.44,dated31'01'2009'respondentNo'lamended bye-laws of respondent No'3 which is contrary to G.O.Ms.No.264, dated 22'06'2OOl' II ,l KL,J W.P No 8543 of20l I 2

3. Petitioner placed reliance on the proceedings dated 24.O7.2024 of the principal Secreta5r to Government, ceneral Administration (services) Department. Learned counser for the petitioner would submit that respondent No. t has directed respondent No.3 to take action as per the byeJaws and to expel all such members who are already promoted as Gazetted Officers. Even then, respondent No.3 is continuing Gazetted Officers in its Association. Therefore, respondent No.1 directed respondent'No.3 to submit compliarrce report. Even then, respondent No.3 did not comply with the same. He has also placed reliance on the proceedings d,ated 29.04 -2023 issued by the Election Officer to contend that Vice president _ IV, Ch.Narsimha Reddy, Secretaqr Grade _ I, Office of Agriculture Market Committee, is a Gazetted C)fficer, even then, respondent No.3 elected him as Vice president.

4. In the light of the said submissions, this Court directed the learned Government pleader to get specific instructions on the same. On instructions, he would submit that the secretar5z Grade - I, office of Agriculture Market committee, is no\a Gazetted post. It is a Non_Gazetted post. \ -7 KL'J W P.No 8543 of 20l r 3

5. Sri Madiraju Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.3 would contend that there are no Gazetted officersinrespondentNo.3Association.Petitionerhereindid not lile any proof with regard to the said election' On consideration of the said aspects vide G'O'Ms'No'44 dated 31.0i.2009, respondent No.1 has amended bye-laws of respondent No.3 and there is no violation of bye-laws and violation of G.O.Ms.No.264, dated' 22'06'200|' He would further submit that there are about 85438 members in Respondent No.3 Association. In the light of the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of 6. granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to respondent No.2 with details stating that respondent No.3 has been continuing. Gazetted Offrcers in its Association contrary to the proceedings dated 24 'O7 '2024 issued by the Principal Secretar5r to Government, General Administration (Services) Department, within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order' On receipt of the said representation, respondent No'2 shall consider and a { -| KL,J W.P No.8543 oi 20 I l 4 dispose of the same, within a period of four (04) weeks and communicate the copy of the same to the petitioner. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stald closed. There shall be no order as to costs. //rRUE coPY// SD/. N.SRIHARI DEPUTY1:EG|STRAR SECTION OFFICER The Chief Secretary, Secre]ar;iat, Hyderabad, Government of Telangana. The-Secretary (Services), General Ad ministration Department (Service Welfare) Secretariat, Hyderabad, Government of Te16ngana. The President K. Swami Goud, Telangana Non Gazetted Officers Central llnion, S/o. Not Known, Room No.21, Telangana Bhavan, IM.J.Road, Nampally, Hyderabad. One CC to SRI M.V.S.SAl KUMAR, Advocate TOPUCI Two CCs to GP FOR GENERAL ADMtNtSTRIIT|ON, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT] One CC to SRI M.SURENDER RAO, Advocate IOPUC] Two CD Copies (r To 1 2 3 4 5 Lt- 7. PSK. BSR ( HIGH COURT DATED:02 t|tt2O2S ORDER WP.No.8S43 of 2011 , ..1i: , ) j_;_ ,ll, i. ln. /.,1.. 0 2 sEP 206 I l l I I .DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS o Pr 2a, f