Disposed

Jampu Tulasi Narayana v. Director

Telangana HC10 Sept 2012PIL/309/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of this PIL alleging that the Nizams Institute of Medical Sciences issued a tender for outsourcing labour services without adhering to the mandatory reservation of posts under government rules. The court directed petitioners to file a representation with the Principal Secretary, instructing the authorities to enquire and pass orders within fifteen days.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioners to file a representation to the Principal Secretary; respondent to enquire and pass orders within 15 days.

Jampu Tulasi Narayana Vs Director — Corruption | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

THE HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE

¶2

AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶3

Public Interest Litigation No.309 OF 2012

¶4

DATED:10.09.2012

¶5

Between: Jampu Tulasi Narayana and another. And The Director, Nizams Institute of Medical Sciences, Punjagutta, Hyderabad and another.

¶6

… Petitioners

¶7

…. Respondents

¶8

THE HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶9

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No.309 of 2012

¶10

Order: (per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Sri Pinaki Chandra Ghose)

¶11

The petitioners filed the present public interest litigation assailing the action of the Nizams Institute of Medical Sciences, the 1^st respondent herein in not implementing the condition of Rule of Reservation in respect of outsourcing appointments as prescribed in Circular Memo No. 17944/668/A2/SMPC/2007, dated 6.10.2007 of the Government while issuing the tender notification dated 17.8.2012.

¶12

It appears, the 1^st respondent has issued a tender notification dated 17.8.2012 for providing labour services through outsourcing. The grievance of the petitioners in this petition is that the 1^st respondent did not follow the Rule of Reservation as mentioned in the Circular dated 6.10.2007, while issuing the aforesaid tender notification.

¶13

Instruction No.3 of the said Circular reads thus:

¶14

“Rule of Reservation as per the existing 100 point roster already prescribed in Rule 22 of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules by the State Government shall be followed in all outsourcing appointments.”

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

¶16

the 1^st respondent issued the impugned tender notification without following the Rule of Reservation as stipulated by the Government in the aforementioned Circular dated 6.10.2007. Hence, he prayed that appropriate directions be issued to the respondents.

¶17

Under the circumstances, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the public interest litigation with a direction to the petitioners to file a representation to the Principal Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Medical & Health, Hyderabad, the 2^nd respondent herein, within a period of one week from today. On such representation being filed by the petitioners, the 2^nd respondent shall enquire into the matter and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of such representation

¶18

The Public Interest Litigation is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶19

__________________________ PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, ACJ

¶20

VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR,J

¶21

10-9-2012

¶22

pnb

Jampu Tulasi Narayana v. Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jampu Tulasi Narayana v. Director

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

K v Satyanarayana, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

K.V. Satyanarayana Vs The Governmetn of Andhra PRadesh

C.J.Karira, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

E. Ram Reddy, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Principal Secretary

B. Srinivasulu Vs The Principal Secretary

Uppana Vijaya Bhaskara Rao, Vs The Executive Engineer

Banjara Welfare Association Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep., by its Principal

Vulli Muralikrishna Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Gulzarilal Kedia, Vs The State Bank of Hyderabad

Naidu Cultural Club Vs The Dy. I.G. of Police

Munchipilli Bangaramma Vs The District Collector

Forum for Good Governance, rep.by its Secretary Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its

M.Sarvotham Reddy Vs The District Collector

A.Sarat Kumar, Vs Sri Satyanarayana