N. Punna Rao, v. The Commissioner,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI W.P.No.44961 of 2018 ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing proceedings, dated 01-07-2015 contrary to the Presidential Orders and G.O.Rt.No.136, dated 26-06-2015 and G.O.Ms.No.13, dated 01-07-2014 issued by the Government of Telangana and not renewing the post of the petitioner as 'contract lecturer'

as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and sought consequential direction to direct the respondents to renew the petitioner as 'contract lecturer' on the same terms and conditions.

2.

Heard Sri N. Ravi Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing for the respondents.

3.

The petitioner contends that he is fully eligible and qualified for the post of lecturer. He was initially appointed as a 'contract lecturer' at Government Polytechnic College, Nizamabad, in the year 2007 and later on, he was transferred to Nalgonda, during 2011. Thereafter, he had been discharging his duties to the best satisfaction of his superiors and everyone concerned. But the respondents have not renewed the services of the petitioner since July 2015. Challenging the same, he has filed O.A. before the then AP Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. When the Tribunal was

AKS,J W.P.No.44961 of 2018 abolished in respect of Telangana State, the said O.A. was transferred to this Court in the form of W.P.(TR).No.5854 of 2017. The petitioner contends that the respondents have given assurance that his case would be considered, if the Writ Petition is withdrawn. Accordingly, the Writ Petition was withdrawn by the petitioner on 29-11-2017. Thereafter, the respondents have not considered the case of the petitioner for engaging him as 'contract lecturer. Hence, the Writ Petition.

4.

Learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the respondents submits that if the petitioner submits fresh representation, the respondents will consider his case and pass appropriate orders on the said representation in accordance with law. 5.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to submit fresh representation to the respondents within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and upon such representation being received, the respondents shall consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders on the said representation in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks thereafter. No costs. 6.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

______________________________________ JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI Date: 30-04-2019 kvr