V.B. Chary, v. Apsrtc
Case brief
What is this about?
This order in a writ petition directs the respondent corporations to consider and dispose of a mercy petition regarding the restoration of increments within two months, holding the inaction arbitrary.
What did the court decide?
Direction to the respondents to consider and dispose of the mercy petition dated 10.04.2014 within two months. Writ Petition disposed of.
What the court decided
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO
W.P.No.37827 of 2014
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC appearing for the respondents.
This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in not disposing the representation made by the petitioner on 10.04.2014, as arbitrary and illegal.
The petitioner was appointed as Driver on 5.8.1987 in the respondent-Corporation, on regular basis. Thereafter, he was promoted as ADC. While so, he was placed under suspension vide proceedings dated 16.10.1996 on the premise that he had been involved in a criminal case. Subsequently, the petitioner was removed from service on 31.07.1997. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal, which was rejected. Challenging the same, he filed review petition and the same was also rejected. Hence, he raised I.D.No.196 of 1999 before the Labour Court-III, Hyderabad, which in turn, granted the relief of reinstatement with
continuity of service. Accordingly, the petitioner was reinstated into service. On 10.04.2014, the petitioner filed mercy petition before the third respondent, who in turn, forwarded the same to the 2nd respondent, vide letter dated 16.04.2014. But, so far, no orders have been passed thereon. Hence, the writ petition.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that after his reinstatement into service, the petitioner made mercy petition dated 10.04.2014 seeking restoration of six increments, but till date no orders have been passed.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondent corporation is arbitrary and illegal in not disposing of the petitioner's mercy petition filed on 10.04.2014.
Whether directions should be issued to the respondents to dispose of the pending mercy petition within a specified timeframe.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Driver
- respondent
APSRTC
- respondent
Third Respondent
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · December
- Registered
- Case no.
- WP/37827/2014
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court