Smt. Mahamuna Begum v. State Of Tg,Prl.Scy,S.E.,Hyd,And 2

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION (TR).No.5692 of 2017 ORDER:

This writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of both the parties.

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief :- " ...... to call for the entire service records of the applicant on the file of the 3rd Respondent and direct the respondent No.4 and declare that the action of the 3rd Respondent in not giving promotion to the applicant in the available vacancies under the limits of Jinnaram Mandal, Medak District, as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, capricious and utter violation of Articles 14, 16 21 of Constitution of India apart from opposed to all principles of natural justice and give promotion to the applicant as LFL HM, in any school in the available vacancy at Primary School, YSR Colony, Bollaram Village, Jinnaram Mandal, Medak District, as LFL HM ...." .

Heard Mr.K.Gani Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services-I. It has been contended by the petitioner that she was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher (Telugu Medium) on 19.09.1985 at Boorgupally, Medak District. The petitioner is placed at Sl.No.30 in the Tentative General Seniority List. Though the petitioner is fully eligible and qualified to be promoted to the post of LFL HM, the respondents are not considering her case for promotion to the post of LFL HM. Therefore, the petitioner has submitted a representation on 12.11.2015 requesting the respondents to consider her case for promotion to the post of LFL HM. But, the respondents have not passed any orders on the said representation nor considered her case for promotion to the post of LFL HM.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition directing the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 12.11.2015 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

Learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents has contended that the case of the petitioner will be examined and appropriate orders would be passed on the representation submitted by the petitioner on 12.11.2015.

This Court, having considered the rival submissions, is of the considered view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 12.11.2015 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J Date: 29-04-2019 Prv