Disposed

M.Ashok Kumar v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC1 Sept 2022WP/27946/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging non-disposal of representations regarding seniority restoration, the High Court granted liberty for the petitioner to submit a fresh representation within fifteen days. Respondents were directed to act within four weeks. The petition was disposed of at the admission stage without examining merits.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to submit fresh representation for seniority restoration within fifteen days; respondent directed to dispose within four weeks.

M.Ashok Kumar Vs the State of Andhra… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO Writ Petition No.27946 of 2022

¶2

ORDER:-

¶3

This Writ Petition is filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in not disposing of the petitioner’s representations dated 14.8.2018 and 10.10.2018 respectively, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India; consequently directing the respondents 2 and 3 to place the petitioner’s name at Sl.No.6, instead of Sl.No.24, in terms of Rule 33(a) of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 with regard to seniority list.

¶4

Heard Mr. Atchuthananda Dondeti, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing for the respondents. Perused the material available on record.

¶5

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that, earlier, the petitioner gave representations dated 14.08.2018 and 10.10.2018 to the 3^rd respondent seeking restoration of his seniority in the cadre of Head Constable (Civil), as per Rule 33(a) of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996. But, the 3^rd respondent has not taken any action so far. However, learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that, liberty may be given to the petitioner to make a representation afresh to the 3^rd respondent, and thereafter, it may be disposed of in accordance with law, by stipulating the time period.

¶6

¶7

Learned Government Pleader Services-I, appearing for the respondents, does not refute the said submission.

¶8

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and without touching the merits of the case, liberty is given to the petitioner to submit his representation afresh to the 3^rd respondent seeking restoration of his seniority in the cadre of Head Constable (Civil), as per Rule 33(a) of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 within fifteen days from today; and on receipt of such representation from the petitioner, the 3^rd respondent is directed to dispose of the same, in accordance with law, within four weeks thereafter.

¶9

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. No costs.

¶10

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

¶11

____________________________ Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

Date: 01.09.2022.

THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

¶16

Writ Petition No.27946 of 2022

¶17

Date: 01.09.2022

¶18

M.Ashok Kumar v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Ashok Kumar v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.v.G.K.Prasad Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Mallireddy Ramu Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

B Muna Swamy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Rentala Vijaya Lakshmi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Vinayathulla, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Chintham Harish Babu, Vs The District Registrar (Registration and Stamps)