Disposed

D. Sanjeeva Rao v. The Executive Engineer Rajendranagar Circle -Vi

Telangana HC11 Dec 2014WP/38119/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed seeking salary payment for service rendered on an outsourced basis between August 2011 and August 2012. Court directed respondents to consider and dispose of the pending representation within six weeks before disposing of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to consider and dispose of the representation dated 10.11.2014 for salary payment within six weeks.

D. Sanjeeva Rao Vs The Executive Engineer… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO

¶2

W.P.No.38119 of 2014

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation appearing for the respondents.

¶5

This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the representation made by the petitioner for payment of salary for the period from 4.8.2011 to 31.08.2012, for the service rendered by him as Divisional Accounts Officer on out sourcing basis in Engineering Section (Executive), Rajendranagar Circle-VI.

¶6

The petitioner submitted an application to the 1^st respondent expressing his willingness to work as Divisional Accounts Officer (Works). As per the instructions of the 1^st respondent, the petitioner attended the works allotted to him. In the meanwhile, proposals were sent to the competent authority to accord permission to engage the Divisional Accounts Officer (works) on out sourcing basis as per G.O.Ms.No.3, dated 12.1.2011, but, so far the

¶7

proposals are not approved, due to which, the salary of the petitioner was not paid. When the respondents have not taken any steps for payment of salary for the period already worked, the petitioner made several representations to the respondents and one among them is dated 10.11.2014.

¶8

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondents are under an obligation to pay the salary to the petitioner for the period he had worked. Learned counsel further submits that the representation dated 10.11.2014 made by the petitioner is still pending with the respondents and so far no orders have been passed.

¶9

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents are directed to consider and dispose of the representation made by the petitioner on 10.11.2014 for payment of salary from 4.8.2011 to 31.08.2012, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶10

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶11

_________________ R.KANTHA RAO,J

¶12

11^th December, 2014

¶13

rkk

D. Sanjeeva Rao v. The Executive Engineer Rajendranagar Circle -Vi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D. Sanjeeva Rao v. The Executive Engineer Rajendranagar Circle -Vi

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

Merugu Kanakalaxmi , Kanakamma, W/o. M. Rayamallu Vs Chaiman and Managing Director

B.Narayanaiah, Driver, Vs Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

Sk. Jahangir Basha sio Kalesha, aged about 37 years, Vs Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

G. Yesudas, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary

Y.a.Ready, Vs a.P.State Road Transport Corporation

Smt Arati Jadhav, D/o Rajendra Jadhav, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh, represented