The High Court dismissed the Writ Appeal against an order directing police authorities to implement a Tribunal order on seniority. The court rejected the appellants' plea regarding merits, noting they had not challenged the Tribunal order previously.
Both I.A. No. 1 of 2020 and the Writ Appeal were dismissed as meritless without costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
t.A.NO.1 0F 2020 IN/AND
WRIT APPEAL NO: 1 12 OF 2020
Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Appeal preferred to against the order dated 23-04-2018 in W.P.No.6504 ot 2018 on the file of the High Court. Between:
...Appellants(Respondents)
AND
P,Bixapathi Rao, S/o. Laxma Eao, aged abort 45 years. working as lnspector of police, Occ lnspector Generat, Wesl -Zo1e. eontrot Room. OCp OtriCe,"t_atO itii"-cjL-" Hyderabad, !o Flat No. D-62,, gril:Ig9 Heights A'partments, Adar;h;#gar, Chilkanagar Road, Uppal, l,4edchal District.-
...Respondents(Petitioners)
lA NO: 1 OF 2020
Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to condone the delay of 626 days in filing the writ Appeal against the order dt. 23-04-2018 made in W.P.No.6504 of 2018.
lA NO: 2 OF 2020
Petition under Section'1 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the orders against APAT orders dated 26.03.2013 in o.A.No.947gl2o1o and batch cases in w.P.No.31210 ot 2017 filed by the petitioner passed in w.p.No.6504 of 2018, daled 23.04.20'18, pending disposal of the Writ Appeal.
Counsel for the Appellants: SRl. S. SHARATH KUMAR
(sPL. GP FOR HOME)
Counsel for the Respondent: SRI AMARENDER
The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT
//
I//
,/
ttem No.40
THE HON'BLETHE CHIEF JUSTICEHI MA KOHLI AND TIIE H N'BLESRIJUSTIC E B, VIJAYSENREDDY t2 oF 2020 l.A.No.l OF 2020 IN/ANDW.A.No.1
JU DGMENT:(PertheHon'blethe ChieJJustice LlimaKohlil
innocuotts orderdated l. The Presentappeal )S directed againstthe 23.04.2018passed by the leamed Single Judge in W.P No'6504 of 2018 filedby the respondentpraying inter alia fbr issuing directionsto the appellantsto implementthe order dated 26'03'2013passed by the Administrative Tribunalin O.A.No.9481of2010'
Page Iof 2
tr.A,No,l l2ol 2()20
\
SD/- C,V, MALLIKARJUNA VARMA DEPUTY REGISTRAR A---' //TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To,
IY.A.No.l l2 of 2020
Page 2 of 2
i i
HIGH COURT
DATED:0410612021
E STA 14:
rl I ,llj:i ?i?1
({
JUDMENT
|.A.NO.10F 2020
IN/AND
WRIT APPEALNO: 112 OF 2020
DISMISSINGTHE I.A.NO.1 OF 2O2O ANDWRIT APPEAL WTHOUTGOSTS
'AU
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should condone the delay in filing the Writ Appeal against the Single Judge's order.
Whether the appellants can challenge the Tribunal order on merits which was not challenged earlier.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
State of Telangana
P. Bixapathi Rao
Hima Kohli
B. Vijaysen Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
