Disposed

G.Chandraiah v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Jan 2021WP/17725/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner challenged the respondents' inaction regarding an application for compensation payment as arbitrary and illegal. The court directed the relevant respondent to consider the representation within two months and disposed of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

"The 2nd respondent is directed to consider the representation dated 26.6.2020 and pass orders within two months."

G.Chandraiah Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATEOF TELANGANA} (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

N/ONDAY, THE^{FOURTHDAY OF JANUARY} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTYONE}

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

HONOURABLE SRI^{JUSTICEA. RAJASHEKER REDDY}

¶5

WRIT PETITI^{ON No.177250F 2020}

¶6

Between:

¶7

G. Chandraiah, S/o. late G.llaiah^{Aged about48 YearsOcc- agriculture,} R/o. Meedikonda Village,^{GhanPurStationlvlandal, JanagaonDistrict}

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of^{Telangana' rep. by its Principal Secretary' (Political) General} Administration^{Department, Secretariat,Hyderaoao}

¶11

2 The Collector, and District^{Magistrate' Waragnal Urban Dist' Warangal'}

¶12

3 The Collector and^{District tvlagistrate,Janagam District}

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

PetitionunderArticle226oftheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe circumstances^{Statedin the affidavit filedtherewith, the High Court may be pleasedto} issueaWrit,ordero,.oi'ectionmoreparticularlyoneinthenatureofWritof rr/]unourr. declaring^{the inactionof the respondentsin considering the applications} daled,^{26tOl2O20tor paymeniof compensationof Rs' 5 lakhs as per GO lvls No 50} C"n"oi nO.inistration aSe;.A)^{Departmentdt: 2110212014as arbitrary and illegaland} J.o nrti.L",^{14 and 21'of constitution of lndia, consequenfly direct the respondents} to *niiJ"r' the^{applications dated: 26tOl2O2O as per the aboveGO}

¶15

IA NO :1 OF²⁰²⁰

¶16

PetitionunderSectionl5lcPcprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedinthe affidavit filed^{in supportof the petition,tne Hlgn Court maybe pleased to directthe} [rpono"nt, 2^{and 3 to consider the applicitiondated:26.6.2020for paying the} "-#p"n"ation (Ser.A) Department dt:^{of Rs. 5 21 lat<hs .O2.2014.as per the GO.tr,4s. No. 50 GeneralAdministration}

¶17

Counsel for the^{Petitioner:SRI B'H'R' CHOWDARY}

¶18

Counsel for^{the ResPondents:}

¶19

GP FOR GENERAL^{ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT}

¶20

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

¶21

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHBKER REDDY

¶22

Writ Petition No.17725 of 2020

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

This Writ Petition is filed for the following relief:

¶25

". . .to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in considering the applications dated 26.6.2020 for payment of compensation of Rs.5 lakhs as per GO Ms No.50 General Administration (Ser.A) Departrnent, dated 21.02.2014, as arbitrary and illegal and also Article 14 and 2l of Constitution of India consequently, direct the respondents to consider the application dated 26.6.2020 as per the above GO..."

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶27

Govemment Pleader for GAD appearing for the respondents.

¶28

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the grievance of the petitioner is already pending before the 2nd respondent by way of representation dated 26.06.2020 and hence, he submits that the writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to consider the representation of the petitioner.

¶29

In as much as the grievance of the petitioner is already pending before the 2nd respondent by way of representation dated 26.06.2020, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the same and pass orders in accordance with law, within a period of two (2) months from the date ofreceipt ofa copy ofthis order.

¶30

¶31

With the above^{direction, this Writ Petition is disposedof'}

¶32

No order as to costs.

¶33

As a sequel thereto,^{miscellaneouspetitions,if any pending in}

¶34

To,

¶35

this writ petition, shall^{stand closed.}

¶36

SD/.K.ONESIM ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR

¶37

//TRUE^COPY'

¶38

SECTION^OFFICER

¶39

The^{Principal Secretary' (Political)GeneralAdministration Department'}

¶40

' iir't" ot Tetangan', Secretariat' Hyderabad

¶41

The Collector,^{and District Magistrate' Waragnal Urban Dist' Warangal'}

¶42

The^{Collector and District Magistrate' Janagam District}

¶43

One CC^{to Sri. B'H R Chowdary' Advocate[OPUC]}

¶44

Two CCs^{to GP for General Administration Department'High Court for the} " silie ot Telangana [oUT]

¶45

Two C.D.^CoPies

Prk

(

HIGH COURT

DATED:04/01/2021

ORDER

WP.No.17725^{of 2020}

¶52

\ e eF rElo
ii'
.$
)i i
o .."
ii IL
I-. ,$
<br>

¶53

Disposing^{of the WP.} without costs.

¶54

€
.J
U-

G.Chandraiah v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Chandraiah v. The State of Telangana

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

K.Ramachandra Reddy Vs The Union of India

M/S.Step Up Enterprises Vs M/S.Karvy Renewable Energy Projects Limited

Ace Engineering Academy Vs Mr. Goutham

M/ s. Balaji Infra India Pvt. Ltd., Vs M/s. Rain Commodities Ltd.

Sri.P.Srikanth Vs M/S. Sree Mahitha Projects Private Limited

Kekkerla Sadanandam Vs The State of Telangana