✦ High Court of India · 29 Jan 2025

SRI G v. SHIVAJI Counsel forthe

Case Details High Court of India · 29 Jan 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
29 Jan 2025
Length
1,000 words

Acts & Sections

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned action of the respondents in issuing impugned proceedings No. A2IDD(TW)13O0312O1 1, daled 2002-201 6, rejecting the case of the petitioners for promotion to the post of Panel Grade Head , Masters (Grade - ll), inspite of orders issued by the Honble Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 5833/2013, dated 25.01 .2016, on the basis of executive instructions issued by the 5th respondent as highly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article '14 and 16 of the Constitution of lndia Gounsel for the Petitioner: SRI G. V. SHIVAJI Counsel forthe Respondents: GP FOR TRIBAL WELFARE The Court made the following: ORDER d THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVTLI - AND THE HON'BLE SMT WSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA WRIT PETITION No.1546 OF 2OL7 - ORDER: Per Hon'ble Si Justtce Abhinqnd. Kumar Shauili) This Writ Petition is hled by the petitioners seeking the following relief: ".....to issue a urit, ord.er or dlrection note pa.rticularlg one in the nature of Writ ol Mq.nd.o,mus d.eclq.ring the impugned action of the respond.ents in issulng lmpugned. proceedings Na.A2/DD(TWSOOA/2OL 1, d.qted 20.02.2016, rejecting the case of the petitioners Jor promotion to the post of Panel Grad.e Head. Mq.sters (Grad.e-II), in spite of ord.ers issued bg leq.rned. And.hra pradesh Admiflistratiae Tribunal in O..4.Aro.58g 3/2OlB, dated 25.01.2016, on the bdsis o.f executive instr-uctions issued. bg the Sth respond.ent as highlg illegq.l, qrbitrary orrLd. 'uiolatiae of Article 74 o.nd. 14 of the Constitution of hdfa and. przss such ord.er or ord.ers as this Court deems lit just q.nd proper in the circumstances of this cqse...D

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the A.p. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short, "the Tribunal") was pleased to dispose of the O.A.No.5g33 of 2OL3 vide order dated 25.OI.2016 by directing the respondents to consider the cases of the petitioners in the .l 2 vacancies available in the category of Head Master Grade-II (Gazetted) as on 25.0I.2016, as per their seniority and eligibility and pass appropriate orders within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. He further submitted that 1n spite of the orders dated

25.01.2016 in O.A.No.5833 of 2013 passed by the Tribunal, the respondent No.2 issued impugned proceedings No.A2lDD/(TW)/3003/201 1, dated 20.O2.2016, rejecting the cases of the petitioners for promotion to the post of Palel Grade Head Masters (Grade-ll), on the basis of executive instructions issued by the Sth respondent, which is illegal. Hence, he seeks to allow the Writ Petition.

3. Learned Government Pleader for Tribal Welfare appearing for the respondents submitted that respondent No.2 has passed a reasoned order and interference of this Court with the order passed by the respondent No.2 is unwarranted. Hence, seeks to dismiss the Writ Petition. 3

4. This Court, having consitlered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, is of the view that to meet the ends of justice, this Writ petition can be disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the cases of the petitioners in the vacancies available in the category of Head Master Grade_II (Gazetted) as per their seniority and eligibility and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. With the above observations/directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shar be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. To, /ITRUE COPY// SO/.L. LAKSHMI BABU EPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER District' 1 The District Collector and Chairman' l'T'D A '.Khammam i. iiiE Fl6jliii&;i;;, i.i.D A''ehJoi'it'atam' Khammam District' 3. The Deputv Cottector L! Wi, ii'.b][, ehid'achalam' Khammam District' 4. The Commissioner oI rnflf fni"ffit"' Telangana'. Hyderabad' 5. The Principal secretaril'i;;f i/v"1il;-(iw)' Department' secretariat' 6 o;'iii;"5R'i. o. v. sHlvAJl, Advo.cate LoPt'191 bourt for the state of Telansana' at 7. Two ccs to Gp FOR Slivicis l, , +*:"EB".o["rJ, .o* soctAL *ELFARE ,Hish court ror the state or 9. Two CD CoPies Telangana. [OUTI T.S..Hvderabad -iigh BM BS Fr I HIGH COURT DATED:2910112025 ORDER WP.No.1546 ot 2017 J o ( i iH.- S r/t 14: 2 3 APn 2025 2 o Dr-so,lTCv\ gO t DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 13 cof4 Vk 6('o d,

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments