The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation v. T.Sanjeev Rao

HI GH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA THE HON'BLE THE CHI EF JUSTI CE RAGHVENDRA SI NGH CHAUHAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE A. ABHI SHEK REDDY W RI T APPEAL No.1 9 5 8 of 2 0 1 7 Dat e: 2 2 .0 1 .2 0 2 0 BETW EEN The Telangana State Road Transport Coporation, RTC X Roads, Musheerabad, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Managing Director and another.

... APPELLANTS AND T. Sanjeev Rao.

...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellants : Mr. G. Vidyasagar For Mr. A. Ravi Babu Counsel for the Respondents : Mrs. P. Radhika For Mr. T. Kistaiah Th e Cou r t m ade t h e follow in g:

JUDGMENT: { Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Sri Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan} The appellants have challenged the legality of the order dated 28.07.2017, passed by a learned Single Judge in WPMP.No.29545 of 2017 in WP.No.23878 of 2017, whereby the learned Single Judge has stayed the termination order of the respondent - petitioner. 2.

Learned senior counsel for the appellants submits that by passing the impugned order, in fact, the learned Single Judge has granted the final relief to the respondent - petitioner. Therefore, the said order deserves to be interfered with by this Court. 3.

It is, indeed, trite to state that certain facts and circumstances may arise where the Court is called upon to grant an interim order which may also tantamount to grant of final relief. In catena of cases, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that grant of an interim order is a discretionary power which may be so exercised as to prima facie grant a final order considering the urgency of the case. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that in case the appellants are aggrieved by the said order, the appellants are free to argue the application for vacating the interim stay order granted by the learned Single Judge before the learned Single Judge. Hence, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. 4.

Learned senior counsel prays that the learned Single Judge should be requested to decide the case finally within a stipulated period of time.

5.

Therefore, this Court requests the learned Single Judge to finally decide WP.No.23878 of 2017 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

With the above directions, the writ appeal is disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ RAGHVENDRA SI NGH CHAUHAN, CJ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A. ABHI SHEK REDDY, J January 22, 2020 DSK