Disposed

K. Ramakrishna Rao, v. The A.P. State Housing Corporation Ltd.

Andhra Pradesh HC17 Dec 2019WP/10302/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged a transfer order directing his transfer over his juniors. The court allowed liberty to file a representation and directed the respondents to dispose of it in accordance with law, disposing of the Writ Petition accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioner to file a representation with the respondents, and the respondents were directed to dispose of the same in accordance with law.

K. Ramakrishna Rao, Vs The A.P. State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2019)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

¶2

Writ Petition No.10302 of 2019

¶3

Order :

¶4

This Writ Petition is filed to declare the proceedings dated 10.07.2019 issued by the first respondent authority transferring the petitioner instead of transferring his juniors i.e., respondents 4 and 5 as illegal and arbitrary.

¶5

The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Work Inspector in the first respondent Housing Corporation; subsequently, he was promoted as Assistant Engineer and presently working at Kothavalasa; while so, the first respondent authority has issued impugned proceedings dated 10.07.2019 transferring the petitioner and four other officers who are working at Vizianagaram; the case of the petitioner is that as per G.O.Ms.No.45 dated 24.06.2019 and the Government’s letter dated 10.07.2019 the junior officers should be transferred to the post where there are vacancies in different districts, but the first respondent authority instead of transferring his juniors i.e., respondents 5 and 6 transferred him from Kothavalasa to Guntur contrary to the said proceedings, hence he filed the present Writ Petition.

¶6

After arguing the matter for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to file a representation before the respondents 1 and 2 ventilating his grievance and the respondents may be directed to consider the same.

¶7

In view of the same, liberty is given to the petitioner to file a representation before the respondents 1 and 2 ventilating his grievance and on filing such representation the respondents 1 and 2 are directed to dispose of the same in accordance with law.

¶8

¶9

The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no

¶10

order as to costs.

¶11

As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in

¶12

this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶13

_____________________________ KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, J.

¶14

Date:17.12.2019 Nsr

¶15

¶16

THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

¶17

Writ Petition No.10302 of 2019

¶18

Date:17.12.2019

¶19

Nsr

K. Ramakrishna Rao, v. The A.P. State Housing Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Ramakrishna Rao, v. The A.P. State Housing Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Alanka Varalaxmi and another Vs the Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corp and 3 Others

M. Rama Rao, Vs The Director

M.D. Amrutha Raj, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Kokkiligadda Rajeev Singh Vs The state of Andhra Pradesh

P Raghuram Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

H Govindu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh