Md. Afzal v. The State Of Telangana,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.30892 of 2018 ORDER:

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the notice dated 27.07.2018 issued by the 2nd respondent is not maintainable, as the 2nd respondent is not the competent authority to issue notice dated 27.07.2018. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent has not disputed the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and contended that the 3rd respondent is the competent authority to initiate action against the petitioner. This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, is of the considered view that since the 2nd respondent is not the competent authority, the impugned notice dated 27.07.2018 is liable to be set aside and it is accordingly set aside. The 3rd respondent is given liberty to initiate action against the petitioner in accordance with law. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 22-01-2020 Prv