Partly allowed

A. Narasimha S/o Late a. Narsaiah v. Osmania University, rep by its Registrar

Telangana HC8 Dec 2006WP/25476/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by an employee of Osmania University challenging the allotment of a residential quarter to a third party. The court dismissed the plea that the allotment was illegal, characterizing quarter allocation as administrative discretion. A direction was issued to consider the petitioner's shift request within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's request to shift to a vacant quarter as per his entitlement and pass appropriate orders within two months from the date of the judgment.

A. Narasimha S/o Late a. Narsaiah Vs Osmania… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2006)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY

¶3

Writ Petition No.25476 of 2006

¶4

Dated: December 08, 2006

¶5

Between:

¶6

A. Narasimha, S/o. late A. Narsaiah, aged about 26 years, Occ: Mali, Osmania University Gardens, Osmania University, Hyderabad.

¶7

… Petitioner

¶8

And

¶9

Osmania University, represented by its Registrar, Osmania University Campus, Hyderabad, and others.

¶10

… Respondents

¶11

Order:

¶12

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking Mandamus to declare

¶13

the action of respondents 1 and 2 in allotting quarter No.C.IV/144, vide Proceedings No.281/EC/HA-II/Estate Cell, OU, dated 04-12-2006, in favour of third respondent as illegal and arbitrary.

¶14

2. Petitioner, a Mali in the first respondent-university, was allotted quarter No.C-IV/22 at his request about eight months ago. He is said

¶15

to have made a representation to respondents 1 and 2 requesting them to shift him from the said quarter, to quarter No.C-IV/44 as the quarter, which he is now living in, is not in a good condition and is unfit for habitation. It is stated that the third respondent who is an employee of the first respondent-university has also made an application to the respondents to allot him a quarter.

¶16

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondents without taking any action on his representation to shift him to quarter No.C/IV/144, allotted the said quarter in favour of the third respondent.

¶17

4. If the petitioner has any grievance with the quarter, which he is residing in at present, it is open for him to make a representation to the respondents, which he did. He can only request the respondents to shift him from the present quarter to any other quarter that is vacant, but he cannot pick and choose a particular quarter. The same is in the domain of the respondents and it is for them to allot quarters as per administrative convenience.

¶18

5. At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the third respondent has occupied quarter No.C/IV/144 pursuant to issuance of allotment proceedings in his favour.

¶19

6. As much as the third respondent has already been allotted the quarter, which the petitioner is claiming, no direction as sought for can be issued at this stage, more so, when the petitioner does not have any right to question the same. However, as much as it is stated that the petitioner has made representation dated 12-09-2006 to the respondents seeking to shift him from the quarter that he is living in at present, respondents shall consider the request of the petitioner in the next available vacant quarter as per his entitlement and pass

¶20

appropriate orders within a period of two months from today.

¶21

7. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶22

JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY.

¶23

December 08, 2006 MRR

A. Narasimha S/o Late a. Narsaiah v. Osmania University, rep by its Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A. Narasimha S/o Late a. Narsaiah v. Osmania University, rep by its Registrar

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

Samala Satyam,S/o. S. Yadagiri(Died) Per L.Rs Vs The Commissioner

S.S.Educational Society, represented by its Principal Vs Andhra Pradesh State Council for Higher Education

Y. Venkaiah S/o Suryanarayana Vs Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies

Dasari Harini Kumari Vs The Registrar, Dr. N.T.R University of Health Sciences

P. Kareem Basha, Vs The Branch Manager

Arrow Cables Limited, Sy.No.343, Bachipalle Village, Vs The a.P.Southern Power Distribution Company Limited