Kalidas. A v. The State Of Telangana And 3 Others

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.13986 of 2019 ORDER:

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

2.

This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the candidature of the petitioner bearing Hall Ticket No.431905100628 for appointment for the post of Telugu Language Pandit for the posts declared in DSC 2012 in spite of eligibility as arbitrary, illegal, violative of Articles 14, 16 and 18(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and violative of principles of natural justice and sought a consequential direction to direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for appointment for the post of Telugu Language Pandit in the vacancies declared in DSC 2012.

3.

Heard Sri K. Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-I.

4.

It has been contended by the petitioner that he is fully eligible and qualified to be appointed to the post of Telugu Language Pandit and he has appeared for DSC 2012 and he has secured sufficient merit and has come within the zone of consideration, but, he was not considered for appointment to the post of Telugu Language Pandit. In those set of circumstances, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation to the respondents on 02.07.2019 and learned counsel

for the petitioner submits that so far the respondents have neither considered the representation nor considered the case of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Telugu Language Pandit. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition directing the respondents to consider the representation, dated 02.07.2019, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

5.

Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents had submitted that the case of the petitioner would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed on the representation submitted by the petitioner.

6.

This Court, having considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel for respective parties, is of the considered view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation, dated 02.07.2019, submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7.

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 10th July 2019 mar