Dismissed

M.D.Mahaboob Dowla, v. Prl.Secy., Health, Medical dept., State of A.P.

Andhra Pradesh HC13 Feb 2024WP/15669/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh rejected a writ petition seeking certiorari to set aside an order denying automatic regularization. The court found the petition misconceived, citing a prior ruling that regularization is not automatic but subject to conditions. No appeal was filed against the rejection.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was rejected without costs; miscellaneous petitions stood closed.

M.D.Mahaboob Dowla, Vs Prl.Secy… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH

¶2

O |o p > COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH;:AMARAV^^^ T>i A (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.NARENDAR

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 15669 OF 2018

¶9

Between:

¶10

M.D.Mahaboob Dowla j 1 S/o M.D.Mahaboob, Aged 61 years Occ. Junior Sanitary Worker (Retd), O/o. Area Hospital Tribal Ramchandrapura m, East Godavari District - 533 288 ...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

Health, Medical dept.. State of Andhra Pradesh,

¶13

1. Principal Secretary The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal^{Secretary,Health} Medical and Family Welfare Deparfment, Secrefariat, Velgapudi Vijayawada, Krishna District.

¶14

The Commissioner, A.P. Vaidya Vidhana Parishad, Vijayawada Krishna District.

¶15

The District Coordinator of Hospital Services, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District - 533 101. ...RESPONDENTS

¶16

¶17

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue order or direction more particularly^one in the Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to O.A.No.1377 of 2017 dated 21.7.2017 on the file of the Honble Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and to set aside the same as being illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Apex Court Judgments and consequently direct the respondents to count the service rendered by the Petitioner^fromthedate of completion of 5 years of service for the purpose of regularization of service with all consequential benefits. lA NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the case^{ofthePetitionerfor} regularization of service from the date of completion of 5 year of service by suspending the operation of O.A.No.1377 of 2017 dt.21.7.2017 by the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G.TUHIN KUMAR

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH^FAMILY

¶21

WELFARE

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 3: SRI SAI NARAYAN RAO (SC) The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

GN. J, 86VN, J. W.P.No.15669 of 2018

¶24

/ 1

¶25

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.NARENDAR AND

¶26

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶27

Writ Petition No.15669 of 2018

¶28

ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice G.Narendar)

¶29

When the case is called, there is no representation on

¶30

behalf of the petitioner.

¶31

The petitioner has impugned the order of the Tribunal rendered in O.A.No.l377 of 2017, dated 21.07.2017,^whereby the Tribunal has been pleased to interpret G.O.Ms.No.212, Finance and Planning (FW.PC.lll) Department, dated hold that the 22.04.1994, and has been pleased to regularization is not automatic, but subject to fulfilling the This

¶32

conditions stipulated at condition Nos.5 and 6 therein. Court a short while ago, while hearing and disposing of W.P.No .8894 of 2012, has been pleased to hold similarly.

¶33

of the considered 3. In that view of the matter, we are opinion that the instant Writ Petition is misconceived and is accordingly rejected. In the event the petitioner is^aggrieved,it is open to the petitioner to seek for review of today s order, No

¶34

costs.

¶35

¶36

GN, J. & VN, J. W.P.No. 15669 of 2018

¶37

» ■*

¶38

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any.

shall stand closed.

SOI- G. HELA NAIDU

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

/ /

To,

SECTION OFFICER

One CC to SRI G TURIN KUMAR Advocate [OPUC]

¶48

Two CCs to GP FOR MEDICAL HEALTH FAMILY WELFARE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶49

One CC to SRI G.SAI NARAYAN RAO, Advocate [OPUC]

¶50

Two C.D Copies MBT

HIGH COURT

DATED: 14/02/2024

ORDER

5 0 3 SEP 202^» to

WP.No.15669 of 2018

REJECTING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS

M.D.Mahaboob Dowla, v. Prl.Secy., Health, Medical dept., State of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.D.Mahaboob Dowla, v. Prl.Secy., Health, Medical dept., State of A.P.

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

Madhurantakam Vijay Bhaskar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

The State of Andhra Pradesh Vs Dr.G.J.Sujnana Raju

Ap Power Generation Corporation Ltd. Vs M Viswanatha Reddy

The Eastern Power Distribution Company of Ap Ltd. Vs S Suryanarayana

T S Rao Vs the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

P. Abdullah Khan, Prakasam Dist. Vs the a.P.Admn.Tribunal, Hyderabad, and 3 Otrs.