A single judge dismissed a writ petition challenging the appointment of a judge. The court held that the matter was already pending before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh following a transfer order, making the current petition non-maintainable.
Admission of the writ petition was declined and the petition was dismissed.
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.
H'GH COURT FOR THE I
;;""r,Hi[ii]f,,i{:;',.,^*"^-^
rH uRffix,#ir:li,[T[B ffi[offin,.
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE THE CHTEF rH E Ho N, B L E s Rr J uJsursdtB:'J::HH'::#-'^
Between: WRITpETtTtON NO: 3864 OF 2020
[;j]ffi IV. Sultana Basha. ;#".^?31*1tA',:tfl s,3Siffi 1,111t:,"".,:;ii,,! jfi ,i%fl&,i,
AND
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue writ or direction preferably writ of quo warranto and mandamus or any other appropriate writ be issued declaring that the appointment of Respondent No.4 void ab initio by setting aside the combined Honble High court Administrative committees decision dated 07.02.2018 regularizing the services of fraudulent Respondent No 4 even the Respondent played fraud on the Honble High Court and proved beyond any doubt, for obtaining appointment of Additional District Judge under Notification ROC No. 370/2012-RC Consequently appoint the petitioner, who is natural choice and next meritorious-cum-eligible candidate for the said post with all consequentiaI benefits of service, monetary, benefit of continuity of service from the date when others were appointed under the Notification No. 370/2012-RC in view of concept of completejustice
lA NO: 1 OF 2020
Petition under Section 151 CPCpraying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, the High Court may bepleased to direct the Respondents 1 to 3 to appoint thepetitioner as AdditionalDistrict Judge, under jurisdiction of the Honble High Court for the State of Telangana pending disposal of
this writpetition by directingthe State of Telanganato create supernumerary post or any otherpostto the petitioner herein pending disposal of writ petitionin the interest of 'comPletejustice
Counselfor the Petitioner:SRI M' SULTANABASHA' PARTYIN PERSON
Counselfor Respondent Nos' 1 & 2: SRIANAND.KUMARKAPOOR SC FORTHC
Counsel forRespondent No' 3: GP FOR LAW& LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS(TG)
Counsel forRespondent Nos' 5 & 6: SRI P' GOVIND REDDY' SPL. COUNSELFOR AP
Counsel for RespondentNo. 7: GP FOR LAW & LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS (AP)
The Court madethe following:ORDER
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND
THE HON'B LE SRI JUSTICEA.RAJA SHEKERREDDY
W.P.No.5864 of 2O2O
ORDER: lPe.the ttan bk'thechle./Jrrsn'e sonsh chandrasharm"
before this courthas filed the The petitioner-in-Person present writpetitionchaliengingthe selectionof respondentNo 4' Shaik InthiazAhamecl,lo the post of AdditionalDistrictJudge'
The l'acrs olthe case reveal lhat the petitioner has eariier plcferred a rvritpetition i.e ,W'P No 7705 of 2013 challengrngthe appointmentof respondentNo 4 to the post of Additional District Jurdge andthc same u'as dismissedon 27 'O4 2Ol7 'The petitioner has thereafterapproached the Hon'bieSupremeCourt and the Hon'ble SupremeCourt in SLP(Civil) No 23761 of 2O\7 'vide order dated 18.09.2017,has permitted the petitioner to withdrawthe SLPq,ith aliberty to file a review petition Thereafter' a revierv petition waspreferred i e , Review W'P M P No 50488of 2017in W.P.No.7705of 2013 and the same was dismissedby a Division Bench of thiscourt on 04' 12'2OIB A third writ petition$'as preferled belbrethis courL againi e 'W'P No B 199 of 2019and the follorvingorder u'as passedby this court:-
"The petitorrcri'lrLs chalLengecLcertain reliefs quaShaik lnthiyazAhomed.
Howeuer,as Shaik lnthiAaz Ahamedis no longertuorktng under thejuisdiction of the TelanganaHigh Court' but is working under the iuisdictionof the Hon'ble HighCourt of AndhraPradesh' the Registryisdirected to transkrthis JiLe to the Hon'bleHigh Coufi ofArudhraPradesh'"
The petitioneris presentin person and has statedbeforethis court thatthe matter was transferredto the High Court of Andhra
\
Pradesh ancl thepetition is very muchpendrngbefo;e theH igh Cou rr oi Anchra Pradesh.
In the considered opinion of thiscourt, as th3 matter is already pencing before the HighCourt of Andhra Pradesh and a Division Ber: ch of this court has alreadytaken a vieu' that the matter now lies rvithin the territorialjurisdictionof the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, a subsequent petition is nol at ail cerlainlrv maintainablc. The petitioner shall certainly be free to make:t prayer for ear11- hearing of the matter which is pendrng befoi'e the High Court ol Andhra Pradesh.
With 1.1e aforesaid, the admission is declined. ResultantLy,
the u,rit petl'-ion is dismissed.
Pendin g miscellaneous applications, iI an1', sha]1 stand
closed.
SD/.T,TIRUMALADEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY'
SECTION OFFICER
To,
.). The Reoistrar(Recruitment),The High court for the State of AndhraPradesh t',tetaoidu. Amlravati- Guniur Dist. Pin 522202
5 ir;;bdi; 5r.i u Srtt"naBasha' Partv ln Person-loPtJCl 6 one cc to sriAnand Kr#r"iilbb(S'c Fon rnciAdvoc'atetoiucl. 7 i*" 6C, t" CpForLa* a Legiitativb Affairs, HighCourt for the Stateof Telangana. [OUT]
HIGH COURT
DATED: 1111112021
, l kie SI4 h'
, L-<br>o
01 DECt$3t
n
!:
*
---i-ar.ir2
ORDER
WP.No.5864 ot 2A20
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION
WITHOUT COSTS
<br>1\ 7,D)rt
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a subsequent writ petition is maintainable when the same matter is already pending before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh due to jurisdictional transfer.
Whether the court should accept a fresh challenge regarding the appointment of a judge already appointed by a concurrence of High Courts.
Sultana Basha
The State of Telangana
Shaik Inthiaz Ahamed
The State of Andhra Pradesh
Satish Chandra Sharma
Raja Sekhar Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
