Dr B Mothilal Naik v. The State Of Telangana

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.7478 of 2019 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief :- " ..... to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to call for records pertaining to Charge Memo G.O.Rt.No.397, Health, Medical and Family Welfare (VC.2) Dept., dated 17.6.

2015 issued by the 1st respondent and set aside the same as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, discriminatory and contrary to rules issued by the Government under Article 14 of the Constitution of India and also declare the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Additional Director on the ground of pendency of disciplinary proceedings is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and further direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Additional Director on regular basis from the date which his Junior was promoted ....." Heard Mr.M.Ratna Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services-I.

It has been contended by the petitioner that he is working as Civil Surgeon and he is fully eligible and qualified to be promoted to the post of Additional Director.

The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are not considering his case for promotion to the post of Additional Director on the ground that charge memo dated dt.17.06.2015 is pending against him.

Learned counsel for petitioner contended that the State Government has framed guidelines in G.O.Ms.No.257 dated 10.06.1999 to consider the cases of employees for promotion against whom disciplinary proceedings/ criminal proceedings are pending. As per G.O.Ms.No.257 dated 10.06.1999, the competent

authority must consider the cases of employees against whom disciplinary proceedings/ criminal proceedings are pending and pass appropriate orders as to whether they are eligible for promotion. But, in the instant case, the respondents are not considering the case of petitioner for promotion to the post of Additional Director in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257 dated 10.06.1999. Therefore, learned counsel for petitioner contends that appropriate orders be passed directing the respondents to consider the case of petitioner for promotion to the post of Additional Director in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257 dated 10.06.1999 and pass appropriate orders. Learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents has contended that the case of the petitioner will be considered in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257 dated 10.06.1999 and appropriate orders would be passed.

This Court, having considered the rival submissions, is of the considered view that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the case of petitioner for promotion to the post of Additional Director in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257 dated 10.06.1999 and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight 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: 09-04-2019 Prv