Allowed

Smt.Y.Salome Mercy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC18 Jul 2024WP/2220/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking absorption of the petitioner into an existing aided vacancy of Lecturer in English in an aided college, on par with unaided lecturers absorbed under prior court directions. The court allowed the petition following its common order dated 26.07.2022 in W.P.No.23205 of 2013 and batch.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed in terms of common order dated 26.07.2022 in W.P.Nos.23205 of 2013 and batch; respondents directed to accord absorption per that order; no order as to costs.

Smt.Y.Salome Mercy, Vs The State of Andhra… — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

APHC010032022022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶4

AT AMARAVATI

¶5

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶6

[3310]

¶7

FRIDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶8

PRESENT

¶9

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO: 2220/2022

Between:

Smt.y.salome Mercy,

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶18

1.N BHARAT BABU

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶20

1.GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION

¶21

2.DASARI NAVEEN

¶22

3..

¶23

The Court made the following:

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

¶26

seeking the following relief:

¶27

“…..(i) declaring the action of the respondents 1 and 2 in not according permission to absorb the petitioner into the existing aided vacancy of Lecturer in English in the 3^rd respondent college, though the petitioner is fully

¶28

¶29

qualified, eligible and deserved, as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory; and (ii) consequently to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to grant permission to the 3^rd respondent to forthwith absorb the petitioner into the existing aided vacancy of Lecturer in English in the 3^rd respondent college with all consequential benefits, if necessary by relaxing the recruitment procedure on par with other unaided Lecturers who were absorbed in pursuant to the directions of this Hon’ble court, (iii) and pass such other order or orders.....”

¶30

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Higher Education, appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.Dasari Naveen, learned counsel appearing for the 3^rd respondent.

¶31

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the subject matter of this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the common order dated 26.07.2022 passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.23205 of 2013 and batch.

¶32

Learned Government Pleader does not refute the said submission.

¶33

Following the same, this Writ Petition is also allowed in terms of the common order passed in W.P.Nos.23205 of 2013 and batch, dated 26.07.2022. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶34

Registry is directed to attach a copy of the common order dated 26.07.2022 passed in W.P.Nos.23205 of 2013 and batch, to this order.

¶35

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

¶36

________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.

¶37

ARR

¶38

¶39

HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO

¶40

WRIT PETITION NO.2220 OF 2022

¶41

Date: 19.07.2024

¶42

ARR

Smt.Y.Salome Mercy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Y.Salome Mercy, 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Veeranki Srinivas, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri. Anjaneya Swami Devalaya Bhakta Mandali, Vs The Commissioner

Smt. Nali Kannamma, Vs The State of A.P.

Kalamala Nagaraju Vs the State of Ap

M. Phanidhara Prasad, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Gogulapalli Mastan Bee, Vs . The State of Andhra Pradesh