Disposed

Gavini Srinivasulu, v. The State Election Commission

Telangana HC11 Dec 2014WA/1380/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against dismissal of writ petition. Bench upheld lower court's view that alternative remedy exists under A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Writ appeal disposed with direction for alternative forum to decide main application within three months.

What did the court decide?

Interim order continued till 19th Jan, 2015; direction to alternative forum to decide main application within three months of filing.

Gavini Srinivasulu, Vs The State Election… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶3

WRIT APPEAL NO.1380 OF 2014

¶4

DATED: 11-12-2014

¶5

Between:

¶6

Gavini Srinivasulu … Appellant

¶7

And

¶8

The State Election Commission rep. by its Secretary, Secunderabad and others

¶9

… Respondents

¶10

THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶11

WRIT APPEAL NO.1380 OF 2014

¶12

JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)

¶13

This appeal is sought to be preferred against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 21.10.2014, by which the writ petition has been dismissed, after considering various aspects of the matter, holding that the appellant has got an alternative remedy under Section 153A of the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 before the competent District Court.

¶14

We are in full agreement with His Lordship. We think that the Hon’ble Trial Judge in exercise of discretion refused to entertain the writ petition. We are not going to substitute with that of ours.

¶15

We find that a decision has been taken by the Presiding Officer rightly or wrongly. Mr. M.S. Prasad, learned senior counsel, however contends that the points which are urged before us and not urged before the Presiding Officer, cannot be agitated before the District Judge since pure question of law is involved. We are not in agreement with his submission. We think that the learned District Judge is capable of deciding all the issues, whether on fact or in law, in accordance with law in this matter.

¶16

Since we granted interim order in the matter, we think that some sort of order should be passed enabling the appellant to

¶17

approach the alternative forum. Therefore, the interim order passed by us in the appeal before us shall continue to operate till 19^th January, 2015 and on expiry of the said date, the interim order passed by us will automatically be vacated irrespective of the appellant filing application before the alternative forum. If any application for interim relief is made before the said forum, the forum will decide the same in accordance with law without being influenced by our order. We desire that the main application, if made within the time frame as aforesaid, will be decided positively within a period of three months from the date of its filing.

¶18

The writ appeal is accordingly disposed of. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

¶19

______________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ _____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J 11-12-2014 Svv

Gavini Srinivasulu, v. The State Election Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gavini Srinivasulu, v. The State Election Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prathipati Vasantha Rao, Vs Lakshmisetti Venkateswara Rao

Y.Ganeswara Rao, Vs The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies

Chinta Ramaiah.and Another Vs PRL.SECTY.REVENUE(ENDOWMENTS)DEPT.AND4 Oth

Society Against Corruption (Regd No. 77/2013) Vs The State of Telangana. represented by its Principal

Aga Publications Vs Vizagapatnam Diocesan Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

B.Krishna Kumari Vs Sri Shekar Babu