Dismissed

K . Nageswer Rao v. Union of India Rep by its Secretary

Telangana HC16 Aug 2017WP/27212/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Writ Petition challenged the Central Administrative Tribunal's refusal to grant interim relief pending a quashing application regarding the petitioner's termination for misconduct. The Supreme Court declined to interfere or discuss merits, dismissing the petition.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition and the Mehiantirrelief Writ Petition are dismissed. The Tribunal is directed to dispose of the pending application expeditiously.

K . Nageswer Rao Vs Union of India Rep by its… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.27212 of 2017

¶3

Date:16.8.2017

¶4

Between : K.Nageswer Rao, S/o Late Paidithalli

¶5

..... Petitioner

¶6

And: Union of India, reptd by its Secretary, Ministry of HRD, New Delhi and three others. .....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mr. K.Sudhakar Reddy

¶7

Counsel for the respondents: Mr. B.Narayana Reddy

¶8

Assistant Solicitor General

¶9

The Court made the following:

¶10

CVNR, J & GSP, J W.P.No.27212 of 2017 Dated:16.8.2017

¶11

¶12

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

¶13

Feeling aggrieved by rejection of his request for grant of interim relief by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’) pending O.A.No.021/000538/2017, which was filed against the order of the petitioner’s termination, this Writ Petition is filed.

¶14

As the facts in detail have been referred to in the impugned order by the Tribunal, it is unnecessary for us to repeat the same. However, it will suffice to note that on a serious allegation of exhibition of immoral sexual behaviour, the services of the petitioner have been terminated , without holding a formal enquiry , in pursuance of notification, vide F.No.142/93-NVS(Vig), dated 20.12.1993. Having considered the serious nature of misconduct alleged against the petitioner, the Tribunal declined to exercise its discretion in his favour for suspending the order of termination.

¶15

Though Mr. K.Sudhakar Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioner, tried to impress upon us by arguing the merits of the case, we are not inclined to express any opinion on the merits of the case in view of pendency of the said O.A. before the Tribunal. If the petitioner succeeds in the said O.A., he will be entitled to all the consequential benefits. In the light of the facts

¶16

CVNR, J & GSP, J W.P.No.27212 of 2017 Dated:16.8.2017

¶17

¶18

and circumstances of the case, we decline to interfere with the impugned order of the Tribunal.

¶19

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. The Tribunal is, however, requested to dispose of the said O.A. as expeditiously as possible.

¶20

As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.33803 of 2017 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous.

¶21

_____________________________ JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶22

_________________________________
JUSTICE GUDI SEVASHYAM PRASAD
16 th August 2017
DR

K . Nageswer Rao v. Union of India Rep by its Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K . Nageswer Rao v. Union of India Rep by its Secretary

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

Md. Shafiuddin, Vs The Superintendent of Police

Borra Adelu, Vs The Prl.Secretary to Government, Environment, Forest

Union of India Vs Mohd.Iqbal

Kavampalli Kannamma , Kanakamma, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

N.John Jayakar, S/o John, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary

Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Rep., Vs B.Bala Swamy S/o B.Tirupathi Rao, 51 years, E. 360325