Yada Madhavi W/O Vijay Kumar v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.27563 OF 2015 DATED:28-8-2015 Between:

Yada Madhavi ... Petitioner And The State of Telangana Rep. by the Principal Secretary Department of Agriculture and Cooperation Telangana Secretariat Hyderabad and others ... Respondents ... Respondents COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: Mr. Ch. Janardhan Reddy COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENTS: - THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the petitioner's representations dt.30.7.2014, 22.8.2014 and 6.12.2014, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner was appointed as Staff Assistant under compassionate appointment scheme due to death of her father, in harness. When respondent No.3 sought to recover certain amounts from the petitioner's salary, purportedly towards recovery of the dues from her father, she has filed W.P. No.25921 of 2012. By interim order dt.22.8.2012 in W.P.M.P. No.33027 of 2012 filed in the said writ petition, this Court has granted interim direction to the respondents not to deduct any such amounts from the petitioner's salary. In this writ petition, the grievance of the petitioner is that though her increments fell due, respondent No.

3 has not been paying the same and her representations dt.30.7.2014, 22.8.2014 and 6.12.2014 made to the said respondent have not yielded any response. After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties, I am of the opinion that interests of justice would be served if respondent No.3 is directed to consider the petitioner's representation and take an appropriate decision thereon and communicate the same. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the petitioner's entitlement or otherwise to the increments claimed by her, respondent No.3 is directed to consider the representations dt.30.7.2014, 22.8.2014 and 6.12.2014, take a decision thereon and communicate the same to the petitioner within one month from the date of receipt of this order.

It is needless to observe that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision that will be taken by respondent No.3, she shall be free to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P. No.35788 of 2015 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

_______________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 28-8-2015 bnr