Allowed

C.S.R. Sarma College, Ogole v. Ap. State Human Right Comission

Telangana HC23 Nov 2010WP/26421/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioners sought to challenge an order dated 13.10.2010 passed without notice or opportunity of being heard by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, which remanded a matter to the AP State Human Rights Commission. The Court held that the impugned order was without any notice and opportunity provided to both sides. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, the order was

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition allowed; impugned order dated 13.10.2010 set aside; matter remitted to Commissioner, A.P. State Human Rights Commission for fresh disposal after notice.

C.S.R. Sarma College, Ogole Vs Ap. State Human… — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2010)

¶1

THE HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI B.PRAKASH

¶2

RAO

¶3

AND

¶4

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI V.SURI APPA

¶5

RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.26421 OF 2010

¶7

ORDER:

¶8

Heard Sri Y.V.Ravi Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Harija Akkineni, learned counsel for the contesting respondent. At their request, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission.

¶9

The first petitioner herein is an institution running a college and the second petitioner being the Secretary and the Correspondent of the college filed this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking to reopen H.R.C.No.483 of 2010 and review the order dated 22.07.2010 in issuing further direction to the petitioners to grant 45 days leave to the second respondent from 15.10.2010 and declare the same as arbitrary and illegal.

¶10

The order dated 13.10.2010 reads as under.

¶11

“Secretary, CSR Sarma College, Ongole, is directed to grant 45 days more leave to the petitioner from 15.10.2010. Review is ordered”.

¶12

Having heard on either side and on perusal of the material available on record, it is seen that there is no dispute with regard to certain chequered events, which led to the present proceedings. Earlier, on a complaint filed before the Commissioner, A.P. State Human Rights Commission, Hyderabad, a comprehensive order was passed on 22.07.2010, which reads as under.

¶13

“The Secretary and Correspondent of CSR Sarma College is directed to grant leave to the petitioner, with full salary, for the period 15^th August to 15^th October, 2010 and she shall resume on 16^th of October 2010. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend her leave at all and she shall be entitled to encash the rest of her EL period. The respondent – the Secretary and Correspondent of CSR Sarma College shall issue ‘no objection certificate’ for such leave by Monday, i.e., 26.07.2010, enabling the petitioner to seek US Visa. The petitioner shall resume to duty, without fail, on 16.10.2010. The vacancy period shall be only for the aforesaid two full months, i.e., from 15.08.2010 to 15.10.2010.”

¶14

Subsequently, the present application has been filed without any notice to the petitioners nor gave any copy of the order impugned.

¶15

Smt. Harija Akkineni, learned counsel for the contesting respondent, submits that in fact, there are other two or three similarly placed employees, who also could not appear earlier and they have filed applications for reopening and the same have been dismissed. There is nothing on record to show that notice was served and in fact, the learned counsel for the contesting respondent also did not receive any notice of hearing before the present order dated 13.10.2010 is passed.

¶16

In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the fact remains that the order impugned dated 13.10.2010 is one without any notice and opportunity provided to both the sides.

¶17

Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 13.10.2010 is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Commissioner, A.P. State Human Rights Commission, Hyderabad, for fresh disposal on merits, after giving notice and opportunity to

¶18

both the sides. No costs.

¶19

____________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, HACJ)

¶20

__________________ (V.SURI APPA RAO, J)

¶21

23^rd November 2010 RRB

C.S.R. Sarma College, Ogole v. Ap. State Human Right Comission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.S.R. Sarma College, Ogole v. Ap. State Human Right Comission

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

Malasala Kishore Venkata Appala Trinadha Rao Vs The Principal Secretary to Government of A.P.

K.Krishna Vs The Managing Director-cum-Vice Chairman

T J Veeresh Kumar, Vs The District Employment Officer

Devarapally Rama Krishna Reddy Vs The District Collector

The Government of Andhra Pradesh,rep.by its Vs Andhra Pradesh Fertilizer Mixtures Manufactures Association

G. Vasuram Naik Vs The District Collector (Panchayat Raj)