K. Dharanija v. The District Educational Officer

[32ss ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA - AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION (TR) NO: 3859 OF 2017 Between:

K. Dharanija, D/o. Laxminarayana, aged about 42 years, S.G. Teacher, U.P.S., Dharmaram, Jammikunta Mandal, Karimnagar District, Rl/o. Dharmaram.

...PETITIONER AND

1. The District Educational Officer, Karimnagar, Karimnagar Dstrict. 505001

2. The Director of School Education, State of Telangana, Hyderabad. 500004

3. State of Telangana, represented by lts principal Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 500022

4. The Chair Person, Zilla Parish ad, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. 505001 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in'the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to declare that the applicant is entitled preferential treatment under Rule 8 @ of the transfer Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No. '12, Education, dated 16-6-2015 while effecting transfer from the present place under rationalization with all consequential benefits by holding the action of the respondents in not extending the benefit of Rule I (c) of the Transfer Rules while effecting transfer of the applicant on rationalization without any justification or reasonable cause on the untenable ground that the applicant has not completed B years of service'in the present place even though the applicant is compulsory shifting from the present place under rationalization which is illegal, arbitrary and unjust. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. D.BALA KISHAN RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION The Court made the following: ORDER I

HONOUI(ABLE SRI IUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR IATRTT PETITION (TR) No.3859 OF 2017 ORDER:

Today when the matter has been taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to efflux of time, the cause in the writ petition (TR) does not survive for further adjudication and the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents has fairly acceded the same. 2.

Recording the above submission of the counsel appearing on either side, the Writ Petition (TR) is dismissed as infructuous. 3.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. No order as to cost.

SD/.G.SIREESHA ASSISTANT EGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OF CER To

1. Two CCs to GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT]

2. One CC to SRl. D.BALA KISHAN RAO, Advocate [OPUC]

3. Two CD Copies PSK.

BBbb

HIGH COUR'T DATED: 1911212022 I I

ORDER

WP(TR).No.3859 of 2017 I HE S14fe I q l o ..) 1g JAll 20n r;t:.

* l.) r DrsMrssrNc oF THE WRIT pETtTtON (TR) AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS I I @c4'"

YV I O