Disposed

N.Srinivas, v. The Commissioner and Director of Intermediate Education

Telangana HC28 Aug 2017WP/11726/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition regarding non-implementation of a Tribunal order. Finding partial compliance and a pending Supreme Court decision, the petitioner was granted two months to implement remaining obligations with liberty for contempt proceedings if failed. Related W.P.M.P. numbers were closed as infructuous.

What did the court decide?

Two months time granted to respondent No.1 to implement the Tribunal order with liberty to avail contempt remedies if not implemented.

N.Srinivas, Vs The Commissioner and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶2

AND

¶3

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD

¶4

W.P.No. 11726 OF 2017

¶5

DATED 28^TH AUGUST, 2017

¶6

Between:

¶7

N.Srinivas … Petitioner
AND
The Commissioner & Director of Intermediate Education,
Telangana State at Nampally,
Hyderabad, and others … Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner : Sri Ch.Jagannatha Rao
Counsel for the respondents : G.P. for Services (T.S.)

¶8

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING

¶9

CVNR, J. & GSP, J. wp_11726_2017

¶10

¶11

ORDER: ( per Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy )

¶12

This Writ Petition is filed feeling aggrieved by non-implementation of order dated 14-03-2011 in O.A.No. 8389 of 2008 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad (for short, 'the Tribunal').

¶13

In obedience to the direction issued by this Court on 07-07-2017, the Commissioner and Director of Intermediate Education, Telangana State at Nampally, Hyderabad-respondent No. 1 is personally present. He has submitted that as soon as the order of the Tribunal has come to his notice, he has partially implemented the same by reinstating the petitioner on 21-06-2017 and that consequential benefits could not be extended to the petitioner as a Special Leave Petition is filed before the Supreme Court against the order of this Court dismissing the Writ Petition filed questioning the order of the Tribunal. He has further submitted that recently, the Supreme Court has dismissed the Special Leave Petition and that he may be granted two months' time to implement the remaining part of the order of the Tribunal.

¶14

In the light of the above submission, the Writ Petition is disposed of granting two months' time to respondent No. 1 for implementing the order of the Tribunal with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy of contempt in the event the order is not implemented as undertaken by respondent No. 1.

¶15

As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.Nos. 14588 and 27744 of 2017 shall stand closed as infructuous.

¶16

________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J.

¶17

Date: 28-08-2017. __________________________ JSK GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD, J.

N.Srinivas, v. The Commissioner and Director of Intermediate Education

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Srinivas, v. The Commissioner and Director of Intermediate Education

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

K.Nagaraju Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Nellore Sujanamma, Vs Attipalli Nagi Reddy

Nellore Suj anamma, W/o.late Radha Mohan Reddy, Vs Attipalli Sudhavathi,W/o.Nagi Reddy

Koka Venkateswara Rao Vs Dubisetty Bhagyalakshmi

P.Darmendra S/o P.Kuppaiah Vs The Chairman --cum- Man4ing Director A.P. Transmission

B. Rami Naidu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh