Disposed

Bookya Narsingh, Karimnagar District v. the Regional Manager,Apsrtc,Karimnagar Region and Another

Telangana HC14 Sept 2021WP/13757/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking annual increments and time scale fixation for an APSRTC driver. Instead of granting immediate relief, the Court directed the petitioner to submit a fresh representation within two weeks. The Court ordered respondents to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to submit fresh representation within two weeks; respondents to pass appropriate orders within eight weeks.

Bookya Narsingh, Karimnagar District Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF^TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH^{DAY OF SEPTEMBER} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE ABHINAND^{KUMAR SHAVILI}

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 13757 OF 2008

¶6

Between:

¶7

Bookva Narsinqh, E.3'18828, Driver,^{APSRTC, Siriclla Depot, S/o Ramdas,Post} & Vill6ge Advip"adira Post,^{MandalYellareddy peta, KarimnagaO't,tllf=r,r,orr*}

¶8

AND

¶9

1 The Regional Manager, APSRTC,^{Karimnagar Region, Karimnagar, Karimnagar} District

¶10

2 The Depot firlanager, APSRTC,^{Jagatial Depot, KarimnagarDistrict}

¶11

RESPONDENTS

¶12

Petition under Article^{226 of the constitution of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavitfiled therewith, the HighCourt may be pleasedto} issue a writ order or direction^{more particularlyone in the nature of writ of mandamus} declaring the action^{of the respondentsin not sanctioningthe Annuallncrements} under pay and Allowance^{Regulationsand not fixing the Time Scaleas per the} Revised^pay scales of^{2001 and 2005 is illegal, arbitrary andcontraryto lawand} against the^{principlesof naturaljustice consequentlydirect the respondents to} sanction the Annual^{lncrementsand Time Scaleas per the Revisedpay Scales of} 2001 and 2005'

¶13

WPMP. NO: 17760^{OF 2008}

¶14

ffi151CPcprayingthatinthecircumStancesstatedinthe affidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighCourtmaybepleasedtodirectthe respondents to^{sanction the Annual tncrements and Time scale as per the Revised} pay scales of 2001 and 2005^{to the petitioner herein pending disposalof the writ} petition.

¶15

Counsel for the^{Petitioner:SRI S. A. K. MYNUDDIN}

¶16

Counsel for Respondents:^{SMT. DANDA RADHIKA (SC FORAPSRTC)}

¶17

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

¶18

THE HON'BtE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAIT SHAVILI

¶19

WRIT PETITION No.'|3757 of 2008

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

When the moiter is token up for heoring, le,trned counsel oppeoring for the pelitioner hod contended thot the petitioner hos flled the presenl wril petition seeking onnuol incremt:nls under poy ond Allowonce Regulotions ond fixing the Time Sc,tle os per lhe Revlsed Poy Scoles of 2001 ond 2005.

¶22

Leorned counsel oppeoring for the pelitioner hod conlended thol the pelitioner is o senior most driver ond lherefore, he is entilled for onnuol increments. Therefore, opproprioie orders be possed in the writ petilion directing the respondenls io consicler the cose of the petitioner for gronting of onnuol incremenis in oc:cordonce with the Rules.

¶23

Leorned Stonding Counsel oppeoring for th,e respondents hod contended thot if the petitioner submits fresh representotion to the respondents, the respondents would consider the some ond poss oppropriote orders in occordonce wilh low.

¶24

This Court, hoving considered lhe rivol submisr;ions of leorned counsel for the porties, is of the considered vierv lhot lhis writ petition con be disposed of directing the petilioner to submit o fresh representolion to'lhe respondenls seeking onnuol in,:rements os per Rules within o period of two weeks from the dote of receipt of o copy of this order. Upon such o represenlotion beirg received, the respondenls sholl consider the some ond poss oppn>priote orders in occordonce wilh low within eight weeks lhereofter.

¶25

Accordingly, lhe wril peiition is disposed of. No costs.

¶26

Pending miscelloneous pelilions, if ony, sholl stond closed.

SD/.K.ONESIM

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Regional [/anager, APSRTC, Karimnagar Region, Karimnagar,^Karimnagar District

¶33

The Depot lr/tanager, APSRTC, Jagatial^{Depot, KarimnagarDistrict}

¶34

One CC to Sri S.A.K.lvlynuddin/Advocate IOPUCI

¶35

One CC to Smt. DandaRadhika,(SC^{FORAPSRTC) Advocate} [OPUC]

¶36

Two CD Copies

¶37

One Spare copy

¶38

MBC

¶39

{/-P/ zn

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1410912021

.(
lii 1 1 0Ci ]ei?

ORDER

WP.Nrr.13757 of 2008

DISPOSING OF THE TT/RIT PETITION

¶46

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶47

{,.
J'',
@)

Bookya Narsingh, Karimnagar District v. the Regional Manager,Apsrtc,Karimnagar Region and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bookya Narsingh, Karimnagar District v. the Regional Manager,Apsrtc,Karimnagar Region and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.Venkateswarlu Vs the Vice Chairman and Managing Director

P. Gnanesh and 2 Others Vs the A.P. Genco., Rep Byits Chief Endineer and 3 Others

M.a.Quadar,Nizamabad Dist Vs the Chairmanand Managing Director,Warangal and 2 Others

Depot Manager, Apsrtc, Hyd. Vs Sri.D.Sukumar, Hyd and Another

The Depot Manager, Apsrtc and Another Vs the Presiding Officer and Another

B. Prabhakara Reddy, Hyd. Vs A.P. Scheduled Caste , Hyd.