In this writ petition, the High Court directed the 2nd respondent to dispose of a petitioner's representation regarding temple service category allocation within six weeks, without examining the merits of the case.
Directed the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders on the representation dated 11.6.2022 within six weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO Writ Petition No.28272 of 2022
ORDER:-
This Writ Petition is filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to declare the inaction of the 2nd respondent in disposing of the petitioner’s representation dated 11.6.2022 and transferred him to 4th respondent Devasthanam vide proceedings dated 30.6.2022, by ignoring the norms issued under G.O.Ms.No.301, dated 12.10.2020, as illegal; consequently directing the respondents to consider case of the petitioner under spouse category and retain him in 3rd respondent Devasthanam, by following the norms in G.O.Ms.No.301, dated 12.10.2020.
2
dated 11.6.2022 of the petitioner, in accordance with law, by stipulating the time period.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________________ Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO
Date: 06.09.2022.
(Issue CC by 12.09.2022) (B.O) HS
3
THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO
Writ Petition No.28272 of 2022
Date: 06.09.2022
HS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the failure of the 2nd respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation under G.O.Ms.No.301 constitutes illegal inaction warranting judicial intervention.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner
2nd Respondent
Respondents
K. Manmadha Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
