The Commissioner And Director Of Intermediate Education, v. N.Srinivas,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD
FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [Special Original Jurisdiction] TUESDAY THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND SEVENTEEN PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO WRIT PETITION No. 21701 OF 2017 Between:
The Commissioner & Director of Intermediate Education Nampally, Hyderabad & Ors.
...
Petitioners V/s.
N. Srinivas & Anr.
...
Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners :
Govt. Pleader for Services [TG] Counsel for the Respondent :
None appeared The court made the following:
:
[order follows]
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT A N D HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO WRIT PETITION No. 21701 OF 2017 O R D E R : ( Oral, Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice Suresh Kumar Kait ) This writ petition is filed by the petitioners invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to and connected with the order dated 14/3/2011 passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, in O.A.No. 8389 of 2008 and to set aside the same by holding as contrary to law and to pass such other suitable orders as this Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Services [TG] appearing on behalf of the petitioners and none appeared on behalf of the first respondent.
3. Vide this writ petition, the petitioners seek a direction thereby to set aside the order dated 14/3/2011 passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in O.A.No. 8389 of 2008. We note that vide the aforesaid order, the learned Tribunal set aside the impugned order dated 25/9/2007 issued by the first petitioner herein removing the first respondent herein from service. The learned Tribunal directed the petitioners to reinstate the first respondent
herein into service with all consequential benefits. However, it is clarified by the learned Tribunal that the order passed by it shall not preclude the petitioners herein from initiating disciplinary action from the stage of conducting disciplinary enquiry on the charge memo already issued after reinstating the first respondent, if they chose to do so within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
4. As stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that fresh disciplinary action has not been initiated against the first respondent herein. The present writ petition is filed after a lapse of more than six years, which is hit by Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The writ petition fails and is liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay of latches.
5. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed in limi ni at the stage of admission. No order as to costs.
6. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions if any, pending in this writ petition shall stands closed.
_________________________ JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT _____________________________ JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO 0 4 -0 7 -2 0 1 7 I s L
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT A N D HON'BLE JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO WRIT PETITION No. 21701 OF 2017 ( Order of the Division Bench delivered by Hon'ble Sri Justice Suresh Kumar Kait ) Date. 04-07-2017 Court Master: I s L Computer No. 43 Circulation No.