Disposed

E.Aruna, v. The Employment Officer, District

Telangana HC3 Aug 2004WP/13556/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition filed by an unemployee seeking a direction to appear for an interview for a sweeper post without providing employment exchange sponsorship. The Court directed the respondents to receive her application and consider her candidature on merits if she possesses requisite qualifications.

What did the court decide?

The second respondent is directed to receive the petitioner's application and call her for interview and consider her candidature on merits if she possesses requisite qualifications.

E.Aruna, Vs The Employment Officer, District — Public Procurement and Tenders | Telangana HC (2004)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO : 13556 of 2004

¶7

Between:

¶8

E.Aruna, d/o E.Geevaratnam,

¶9

r/o MIG-20, Phase-I, Pothireddypally X Roads, Mandal Sangareddy, Medak District.

¶10

..... PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The Employment Officer, District Employment Exchange, Medak at Sangareddy 2 The Manager, United India Insurance Co.Ltd.,

¶13

Regd.Office, H.No.3-5-817, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad-29.

¶14

.....RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to appear for written test and interview for the post of Full Time Sweeper which are scheduled to be held on or after 1st week of August, 2004 without insisting her name from the Employment Exchange sponsorship.

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.RAMGOPAL RAO

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent No.1.: GP FOR LABOUR &Employment Counsel for the Respondent No.2: None appeared.

¶18

The Court made the following :

¶19

ORDER:

¶20

The petitioner is an unemployee. She came to know that the 2^nd respondent requested the 1^st respondent-employment exchange to send a list of candidates who fulfilled certain requirements mentioned in the requisition for the purpose of consideration of those candidates for the post of full time sweeper.

¶21

According to the petitioner, there was no public notification inviting the applications from the eligible candidates and, therefore, she approached this Court seeking a direction to the second respondent to receive her application and to permit her to appear for interview for the purpose of consideration of her candidature for the post of full time sweeper.

¶22

In view of the grievance expressed by the petitioner, the second respondent is directed to receive the application of the petitioner, if there was no public notification inviting the applications from public, and if she possesses the requisite qualifications, she may be called for interview and her candidature may be considered along with other candidates on merits according to rules.

¶23

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶24

3^rd August, 2004 N.B: C.C. by tomorrow (BO) Nn.

¶25

¶26

1. The Employment Officer,

¶27

District Employment Exchange, Medak at sangareddy.

¶28

2. The Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Registered Office H.No. 3-5-817, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad-29.

¶29

3. 2 CD Copies.

E.Aruna, v. The Employment Officer, District

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E.Aruna, v. The Employment Officer, District

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

G.V. Raju S/o Veer Raju Vs The Depot Manager, Apsrtc.

T.Ruthamma Vs The Executive Director

B.Abdul Rawoof, Vs The Vice Chairman and M.D., a.P.State Civil Supplies

M/S Andhra Pradesh Foods Rep.by M.D. R. Vs Sery. Labour Dept. Hyd.

The Gangaputra Society, Vs The Assistant Director of Fisheries

K.Ratnababu and 3 Others Vs Sect.Apseb Hyderabad and 3 Others