B. Srinivas Reddy v. State Of Telangana

High Court for the State of Telangana The Hon'ble The Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan and The Hon'ble Dr Justice Shameem Akther W.A. No. 492 of 2019 Date: 12-07-2019 Between:

B. Srinivas Reddy and 9 others ...Appellants And The State of Telangana Rep. by its Chief Secretary (G.A.D.), Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 21 others

...Respondents

Counsel for the Appellants:

Mr. Ramesh Bura Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 7: GP for Services Counsel for respondent Nos.8 to 22: Mr. V. Ravichandran The Court made the following:

HCJ & Dr.SA, J W.A.No.492 of 2019 Dt: 12-07-2019 Judgment: (per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan) The appellants-writ petitioners have challenged the legality of the order dated 22-04-2019, passed by the learned Single Judge, in Writ Petition No.38269 of 2018, whereby the learned Single Judge has directed the respondent No.1, State Government, to pass appropriate orders on the proposals submitted by the respondent No.6, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, with regard to the upgradation of the posts of Forest Beat Officers, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order.

Since it is the appellants, who had approached the learned Single Judge praying that a direction be issued to the Government to upgrade their posts of Forest Beat Officers, since the respondent No.6, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, had also sent proposals to the Government that the said posts need to be upgraded, and since the learned Single Judge has directed the Government to consider the said proposals, it is beyond the understanding of this Court as to how the present

HCJ & Dr.SA, J W.A.No.492 of 2019 Dt: 12-07-2019 appeal is maintainable. After all, the appellants cannot be aggrieved by the order passed in their favour. Once this fact was pointed out to the learned counsel for the appellants, and once he was asked to explain as to how this appeal is maintainable against an order, which per se is in favour of the appellants-writ petitioners, he has not been able to give any satisfactory answer.

Hence, this appeal being devoid of any merit is, hereby, dismissed.

As a sequel to dismissal of the writ appeal, Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, stand disposed of as infructuous.

_____________________________ (Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, CJ) _____________________ (Dr. Shameem Akther, J) Dt: 12th July, 2019 lur