Disposed

Ch.Prakash Rao, v. Principal Chief Conservator of Forest and

Telangana HC13 Apr 2022WA/1158/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appellant, a Divisional Forest Officer, approached the High Court challenging a service order via writ appeal. The Government Pleader informed the court that the appellant had already been promoted, rendering the appeal infructuous. The court disposed of the appeal with liberty to file a fresh petition if necessary.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of as infructuous with liberty to file fresh writ in case need arises.

Ch.Prakash Rao, Vs Principal Chief Conservator of… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD}

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE^{THIRTEENTH DAY OF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE^{SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA} AND THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE^{ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI}

¶5

WRIT APPEAL NO : 1158^{0F 2016}

¶6

writ Appeal under clause^{15 of the Letters Patent preferred against the order} dt.18-10-2016 in W.P.No.34B^{45 ol 2016. on the file of the High Court'} Between:

¶7

Ch.Prakash Rao,, S/o^{Eadaiah, 53 Years, Divisional Forest Officer,} Khammam' Khammam District

¶8

...Appeilanuwrit Petitioner

¶9

AND

¶10

Princioal Chief Conservator^{of Forest&, Head of Forest Force, Stateof} Telanbana. Aranva Bhavan,^{Saifabad, Hyderabad.}

¶11

2 consJrviitir oi f6tett,^{Khammam, Khammam District Stateof Telangana} 3 Si"i" of iJtanoana, Rep. bv^{its Principal Secretary, Environment, Forest,} SiienCe &.Tec"h notogy^{Depi.. SecretariatB uild i ng,Hyderabad}

¶12

...ResPondents/ResPondents

¶13

LA. NO: 1 OF² 016(WAMP.^{NO: 2488oF 2016)}

¶14

Petition under Section^{151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit filed^{in supportof the petition,the High court may be pleasedto} suspend the operation of^{the ProceedingsNo. 97412014-vlc-3,dt. 03.10.2016} issued by the lst^{Respondent pending disposalof the Writ Appeal'}

¶15

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2016(W^{AMP. NO: 2489 OF 2016)}

¶16

Petition under Section^{151 CPCprayingthatin the circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed in^{supportof the petition, the High courtmay be pleased to direct} the Respondents to^{considerthe case of the Petitioner for promotion to the postof} Dy. conservator of^{Forest as per seniority withoutreferenceto Proceedings No.} 974t2014-vlc-3, dt.03.10.2016^{issuedbythe15, Respondentin termsof Rule 22} of AP State and subordinate^{serviceRules pending disposalof the writ Appeal.}

¶17

¶18

il2ll

¶19

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2016(WAMP. NO: 3120 OF 2016)

¶20

Betwee n:

¶21

Principal Chief Conservator of Forest &, Head of Forest Force, State of Telangana, Aranya Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

¶22

Conservator of Forest, Khammam, Khammam District State of Telangana

¶23

State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Environment, Forest, Science &.Technology Dept., Secretariat Building, Hyderabad.

¶24

... Respondents/Petitioners

¶25

AND

¶26

Ch.Prakash Rao,, S/o Eadaiah, 53 Years, Divisional Forest Officer, Khammam, Khammam District.

¶27

... Responde nUPetitione r

¶28

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 vacate the interim order passed in dated 21 .11 .2016 in WA No.^'1 158 of 2016. Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. P.V. KRISHNAIAH

¶29

Counsel forthe Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES - |

¶30

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶31

THE HON'BLE TI.IE CI]IEF IUSTICE SATISH C RA SHARMA

¶32

AND

¶33

THE HON'BLE SRI IUSTICE HINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶34

W.A.No. 1158 of 2016

¶35

IUDGMENT: ,p,, la t tu,t\4. tt.t t tk j,'ti? ) r',.,f,tru .'t.lmll

¶36

The present appeal ;s arising out of Or&r dated 18.10.2016, passed bythe leamed Single Judge in V.P.No.34845 of^2016.

¶37

kamed Govemment Pleader for Services, appearing for^the respondents, has informed this Cowt that the appellant^{was later on} promoted, rendering the present writ appe{^{as infructuous.}

¶38

In view of the above, the \Vrit Appeal stands disposed of^{with a}

¶39

liberq, to the appellant to file a fresh writ Petition^{in caseneed so arises} in future.

¶40

No costs.

¶41

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending^{if any,stand closed'}

¶42

¶43

SD/.M.VIJAYA BHASKAR DEPUTY REGI'TRAR //TRUE COPY// .(,/ SECTIONOFFICER

¶44

To,

¶45

The Principal chief conservator^{of Forest &, Head of Forest Force, Stateof} Telanoand, Aranva Bhavan,^{Saifabad, Hyderabad.} Z. f[e C"onslrviioiot^{Forest, khammam, Khammam District State of Telangana} 5. The Princioal Secretary,^{Environment, Forest, Science &.Technology Dept',} - State of T6langana, S6cretariat Building, l-!y{e.r{-ad 4. One CC to SrIP.V. Krishnaiah,^Advocate [OPUC] 5. iw; Ccs to GP^{for Services-|, High Court for the Stateof Telangana at} Hyderabad. [OUT] 6. Two CD Copies 7. One Spare CoPY $"

CHR BS

HIGH COURT

DATE D : 1 310412022

JUDGMENT

9- STAT4:
a C)r
(
3 0 l\Jt ?$2? l5
O -A ii
ci;I
[ !--ir 1.." 1. <br>

¶52

W.A.No.1158 of 2016

¶53

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT^APPEAL AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS

¶54

(n\ *"@

Ch.Prakash Rao, v. Principal Chief Conservator of Forest and

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ch.Prakash Rao, v. Principal Chief Conservator of Forest and

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

I.Narasimha Murthy Hyd Vs Secy Min of Law J and Home Affairs New Delhi and 8 Others

Letter submitted by the Member Secretary Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Shabbir Hussain alias Jaber Patel Vs The State of Telangana

Smt, Ganamalla Kalavathi, Vs M/s.Singareni Collieries Company Limited

Saini Satish Kumar, Bhongir Dist Vs Prl Secy, Panchayat Raj Dept., Hyd and 9 Ot

Ekashila High School, Vs State of Telangana