Disposed

Dr.K.Jyothirmai Madhavi, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC21 Dec 2023WP/32574/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of multiple writ petitions concerning a Career Advancement Scheme promotion. Granting indulgence to petitioners, the court directed the University to allow submission of published articles and consider them for promotion under specific regulations, setting timelines for committee reconstitution and final orders.

What did the court decide?

Granted one opportunity to submit articles; directed University to consider them for promotion; directed committee reconstitution within two weeks and final orders within following three weeks.

Dr.K.Jyothirmai Madhavi, Vs The State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NOS.32596, 32381, 32406, 32572 AND 32574 OF 2023

¶4

ORAL COMMON ORDER:

¶5

Heard Sri B.Abhay Siddhanth Mootha, Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners, Sri P.Varaprasada Rao, Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Co-operation for the Respondent No.1, Sri C.B.Adarsh Kumar, Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Higher Education appearing for the Respondent No.2 and Sri Harinath Reddy Somagutta, Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.5.

¶6

When these matters were listed on 18.12.2023, having regard to the peculiar nature of the facts, this Court has directed Sri Harinath Reddy Somagutta, Learned Standing Counsel appearing for Respondent No.5, to take instructions in this regard. Accordingly, this case is posted today.

¶7

Learned Counsel for Respondent No.5 has submitted brief information, as received by him, insofar as the Writ Petitioners in all the Writ Petitions are concerned.

¶8

This Court has gone through the relevant provisions of the Notification as well as the Regulations (Ex.P-4) governing the Career Advancement Scheme in the Respondent No.3-University.

¶9

¶10

Having regard to the nature of contentions raised in these Writ Petitions, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of these Writ Petitions with the following directions to the Respondent No.3-University as well as Respondent No.6, which is the Discipline wise Selection Committee:

¶11

(i) Notwithstanding the fact that the Writ Petitioners could not submit the published articles along with their applications as well as during the course of the interview, this Court has deemed it appropriate to show indulgence and grant one opportunity to the Writ Petitioners to furnish the list of articles and the texts of the articles to the Respondent No.6Committee within one week from today.

¶12

(ii) The Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.6 are directed to now accept and consider the said articles (to be submitted by the Writ Petitioners) in terms of sub-para (iv) of para 6 of the Regulations (Ex.P-4) governing Career Advancement Scheme in Respondent No.3-University, dated 10.12.2019 vide its Proceedings No.3888/Ser(T)-I/2019.

¶13

(iii) For the purpose of clarity, sub-para (iv) of para 6 of the Regulations governing Career Advancement Scheme in Respondent No.3-University is also extracted hereunder:

¶14

“6(iv). Must have published seven (7) research papers in the peer-reviewed journals out of

¶15

¶16

which three (3) research papers should have been published during assessment period.”

¶17

(iv) If any of these candidates (Writ Petitioners) would qualify themselves in terms of the procedure as prescribed in the Regulations mentioned herein above, they shall be considered for promotion under Career Advancement Scheme as per the relevant Regulations.

¶18

With these directions, all the Writ Petitions are disposed of. Respondent No.3-University is directed to constitute the same Committee (Respondent No.6) within two (02) weeks after submission of the articles by the Writ Petitioners. The Final Orders, after consideration of the articles, shall be passed by the competent authority within three (03) weeks thereafter. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶19

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall also stand closed.

¶20

_____________________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD,J

¶21

Date: 21.12.2023 ARR

¶22

¶23

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD

¶24

WRIT PETITION NOS.32596, 32381, 32406, 32572 AND 32574 OF 2023

¶25

Date: 21.12.2023

¶26

ARR

Dr.K.Jyothirmai Madhavi, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.K.Jyothirmai Madhavi, 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bandi Padmavahi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Pathivada Nagaratnam Vs the State of Ap

D.Chinnaiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

N Pulla Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Dr.K.Uma Maheswari Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Dr B Pratapa Vs the State of Ap