State Of Telangana,Prl.Scy,S.E.,Hyd,And 2 v. A.Devaiah,Adilabad Dist,And 2

[ 3313 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK WRIT PETITION NO: 32599 OF 2014 Between:

1. State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, School Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The Commissioner and Director of School Education, Government of Telangana, Hyderabad.

3. The District Educational Officer, Adilabad, Adilabad District ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS lN OA.No.98/2009 AND

1. A.Devaiah, S/o Pochaiah, S.G. Teacher, Primary School, Chintaguda, Jannaram Mandal Adilabad District.

...RESPONDENTS/APPLICANT IN OA.No.98/2009

2. A.P. Administrative Tribunal, rep. by its Registrar, Purani Haveli, Hyderabad.

3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Adilabad, Adilabad District. (R3 is formal party) ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of "WRIT OF CERTIORARI" calling for the records relating O.A. No.98/2009 on the file of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal and to quash or set aside the order dated 16-06-2011 in O.A.No.9B/2009 by holding the same as erroneous and contrary to law l.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(WPM P. NO: 40758 OF 20141 Petition under Section '151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the orders dated 16-06-2011 in O.A.No.9B/2009, on the file of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, pending final disposal of the writ petition.

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. GP FOR SERVICES I (TG) Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: SRl. BANDA PRASADA RAO Counsel forthe Respondent No.2 and 3:--- The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK Writ Petition No.32599 of 2OL4 ORDER: fer Hon'ble Si Justice Abhinand Kumar Shauiti) This Writ Petition is liled by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Wit of Certiorariby calling for the records relating to O.A.No.9S of 2OO9 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, at Hyderabad (for short, 'the TribunalJ and to quash the same by setting aside the order dated 16.06.2011 passed in O.A.No.9B of 2OO9 by holding the same as erroneous and contrary to law. 2.

Heard the learned Government Pleader for Services-I, for the petitioners and Mr. B. Prasada Rao, learned counsel for the 1st respondent.

3.

Learned Government Pleader for the petitioners contended that the 1"t respondent was working as Secondary Grade Teacher (S.G.T.), and he had relinquished his promotion in the 2OO9; thereafter, the petitioners have not considered the case of the 1"t respondent for promotion on the ground that earlier, the

AKs,J & PK,J wP_3)599_2o14 l"t respondent had relinquished his promotion; in those set of circumstances, the 1"t respondent had approached the Tribunal by fi1ing O.A.No.9B of 2OO9; the Tribunal, vide order dated 16.06.2011, was pleased to dispose of the O.A. in favour of the 1"t respondent by directing the petitioners to consider the case of l"t respondent for promotion in terms of G.O.Ms.No.145, dated i4.06.2OO4, without appreciating any of the contentions raised by the petitioners; and therefore, prayed this Court to pass appropriate orders in the Writ Petition by setting aside the order passed by the Tribunal in O.A.No.9B of 2009, dated 16.06.2OI1, and allow the Writ Petition.

4.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the 1"t respondent contended that as per G.O.Ms.No.145, dated 14.06.2OO4, an employee who has relinquished his promotion, his case can be considered in the subsequent years, and the Tribunal has merely directed the petitioners to consider the case of the l"t respondent for promotion in terms of G.O.Ms.No.145, dated 14.06.2004; therefore, the Tribunal has rightly directed the petitioners to consider the case of 1"t respondent for promotion in terms of G.O.Ms.No.145, dated 14.06.2OO4; and therefore, there are no merits in the Writ Petition, and the same is liable to be dismissed.

::3::

AKs,J & PK,J wp_))599-2o14 5.

This Court, having considered the submissions made by the parties, is of the considered view that the State Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.145, dated 14.06.2OO4, wherein it was clearly stated that in case the persons who have relinquished their promotions, their cases can be re-considered for promotion; and the Tribunal has merely directed the petitioners to consider the case of l"t respondent for promotion in terms of G.O.Ms.No.145, dated 14.06.2004. Therefore, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the O.A. in favour of the 1 st respondent. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal in O.A.No.98 of 2OO9, dated 16.06.2011. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs 6, As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if aly in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

SD/. K.SREERAMA MURTI{Y //TRUE coPY// AsslsrAHEGlsrRAR To, sEcTloN OFFTCER

1. f*o CCs to Gp for Services l, Hiqh Court for ! z. one cc t jsri-br'Xaa prasada Rao, Advocaie i6$t31r",rrnana, [oU!

3. Two CD Copies TJ GJP I I Bsh

HIGH COURT DATED:0610112023 ,dE sTArA.

ORDER

{) e Jo O $ I rtB ?[21 WP.No.32599 of 2014 i .{:

A.

(!

.DTSMISSING ?.ITE WRIT PETITION WITI{OUT COSTS.

6" Grar Bsk r zTlt l-