Dismissed

Sri Abburi Singaiah v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its

Telangana HC3 Jul 2008WP/9909/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging an order recognizing another individual as Secretary/Correspondent. The court held the order was appealable and directed the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 89 of the Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file appeal under Section 89 of Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982 within two weeks; writ petition disposed of.

Sri Abburi Singaiah Vs The Government of Andhra… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9909 of 2008

¶6

Between:

¶7

Sri Abburi Singaiah S/o.Ramaiah R/o.Basavannapalem village maddipadu Mandal, Prakasam District ..... PETITIONER

¶8

AND

¶9

1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Prl.Secretary, Higher Education Department, secretariat,Hyderabad

¶10

2 The Commissioner of Collegiate Education Government of AP.,Nampally,Hyderabad

¶11

3 The Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education Guntur

¶12

4 Sri Muddana Bhaskar RAo S/o.Venkatappaaih

¶13

R/o.thimma Samudram N.G.Padu Mandalam,. Prakasam District

¶14

.....RESPONDENT(S)

¶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 to issue a writ order or directionmore particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus by declaring the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in proceedings Rc.No.791/Admn.III-1/2007 dated 17.4.2008 is illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to APEducation Act besides violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and pass

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.Y.RAMA RAO

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR EDUCATION

¶18

The Court made the following :

¶19

O R D E R:

¶20

In this writ petition the proceedings passed by 2^nd respondentCommissioner of Collegiate Education, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in Rc.No.791/Admn III-1/2007, dated 17.4.2008 are under challenge.

¶21

The petitioner claims to have presented a representation dated 24.7.2007 to recognize him as the Correspondent of V.V. & M Degree College, Ongole. The 2^nd respondent, according to the petitioner, without considering his application proceeded to consider the application submitted by 4^th respondent- Muddana Bhaskar Rao and recognized him as Secretary and Correspondent of V.V. & M. Degree College, Ongole and therefore the order passed by 2^nd respondent in violation of principles of natural justice and suffers from serious infirmity.

¶22

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner took me to the earlier proceedings initiated by the petitioner by way of filing a writ petition and also a contempt case. Various other submissions have been made before me. They are not required to be dealt with in view of the order proposed to be passed.

¶23

Indisputably the order challenged in this writ petition is appealable under section 89 of Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is directed to avail the efficacious remedy available under section 89 of Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982. The petitioner shall file the appeal before the concerned authority within two weeks and the concerned authority shall entertain the appeal and pass appropriate order in accordance with the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Education Act, 1982. This order does not preclude the petitioner to work out any other remedies, if any available under law.

¶24

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶25

3^rd July 2008. (B.Seshasayana Reddy,J) cc in two days. tnb

¶26

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

// TRUE COPY //

SECTION OFFICER

1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies

¶31

Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK}

¶32

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE

¶33

B.SESHASAYANA REDDY

¶34

WRIT PETITION NO.9909 OF 2008

¶35

03-07-3008.

Sri Abburi Singaiah v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Abburi Singaiah v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its

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

Smt. D.Jaya Vs G.H.M.C

Sri Reddy Sangaiah, Vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation

A. Prabhavathi Vs The Competent Office, Rep. by its Executive Engineer,Aphb.

Birender Kumar Vs The Government of India, Ministry of Defence

Penumatsa Venkata Ramakrishnamraju Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal

G. Sanjeev Kumar, Vs The Municipal Corporation of Nizmabad