Disposed

Boppanna Satyanarayana v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC25 Jul 2022WP/9484/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the writ petition challenging a temple transfer declaration became infructuous after respondents complied with interim directions by effecting the transfer. The court granted liberty to the petitioner to claim salary arrears and directed respondents to consider representation within four weeks before disposing of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to submit representation for salary arrears; respondents directed to pass orders within 4 weeks.

Boppanna Satyanarayana Vs The State of Andhra… — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

¶3

WRIT PETITION No.9484 of 2021

¶4

ORDER :

¶5

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

¶6

“…..to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2^nd respondent in issuing proceedings in Rc.A2/11025(34)/1/2021, dated 17.04.2021 repatriating the petitioner from 3^rd respondent temple to 4^th respondent temple as bad, illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, contrary to Section 57(2)(a)(i) proviso of A.P.Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 and violative of Article 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the 2^nd respondent proceedings dated 17.04.2021 and pass such other orders.”

¶7

Heard Mr. D.V.Sasidhar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K. Madhava Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶8

During hearing, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents complied with the interim directions of this Court dated 07.05.2021. In view of the same, the main relief sought by the petitioner in the writ petition has become infructuous, therefore requested to issue a direction by granting liberty to the petitioner to submit representation for claiming arrears of his salary.

¶9

Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the main prayer sought by the petitioner in the writ petition has became infructuous, as the transfer of the petitioner effected by the respondents in terms of interim directions of this

¶10

¶11

Court dated 07.05.2021. Hence, granting liberty to the petitioner to submit representation to the respondents seeking for payment of arrears of his salary, on such submission made by the petitioner, the respondent authorities are directed to consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of four (04) weeks thereafter.

¶12

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

¶13

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

¶14

__________________________________ DR.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

Date: 25.07.2022.

THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

¶19

WRIT PETITION No.9484 of 2021

¶20

Date: 25.07.2022.

¶21

Boppanna Satyanarayana v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Boppanna Satyanarayana 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

N. Vijaya Bhaskar, Vs the State of Ap

K.S.R. Lingeswari Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Bhimavarapu Babu Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

G Bhaskara Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

K Padmavathi Vs the State of Ap

Kum. Dasari Venkata Geetha Anuhya, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh