Disposed

A. Shyam Naik v. State of Telangana, And 2 Others

Telangana HC6 Jul 2022WP/11261/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge Writ Bench directed the Principal Secretary to dispose of the petitioner's pending representation dated 07-06-2022 within 45 days and pass final orders in disciplinary proceedings pending since 2013, deeming it fit due to delay.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the first respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 07-06-2022 and pass final orders on disciplinary proceedings within 45 days.

A. Shyam Naik Vs State of Telangana, And 2 Others — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYOERABAP

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 1 1261 0F 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

A. Shyam Naik, S/o. A. Bheelya Naik, Aged about 49 years, Motor Vehicle lnspector, lntegrated Check Post, Bhoraj, Adilabad. R/o '13-124, Vidyanagar, Khanapur, ir,lirmal.

¶9

...PETIT|ONER

¶10

AND

¶11

State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Transport, Roads and Buildings Department, TS Secretariat, Hyderabad-500022.

¶12

The Transport Commissioner, Telangana State, Khairatabad Hyderabad500004

¶13

The Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings, Represented by its Secretary, Government of Telangana, T.S Hyderabad.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition Under Article 226 of rhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High'Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or Direction, more partrcularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the Respondents in denying promotion to the Petitioner as Regional rransport officer /grant of Special Promotion Post scale 1-A on the ground of pendency of dis-iplinary proceedings pertaining to December 2013 vide T.E.C No. 6/2018 despite completion of enquiry and submission of f urther representation dated 0710612020 (acknowledged on 08/06/2020) as being arbitrary, illegal, unjust, vitiated by unreasonable delay and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of India and consequently declare that the petitioner is entifled to have his claim consrdered and be promoted to the post of Regional rransport officer or in the alternative be sanctioned special Promotion post Scale 1-A with all incidental and related benefit duly holding that the proceedings pursuant to T.E.C. No. 6/2018 are deemed to have be dropped in the interest of justice.

¶16

l.A.NO:1 OF 2022

¶17

Petition Under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the aff idavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Regional rransport officer or to sanction of special promotion post scale 1-A without reference to T.E C No.6/2018.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI.V.RAVICHANDRAN Counsel for the Respondents : G.P FOR SERVICES-lll The Court made the following ORDER

¶19

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI

¶20

W.P. No.1126L of 2022

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

This writ petition has been filed to seeking a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in denying promotion to the petitioner as Regional Transport Officer/ grant of Special promotion Post Scale-1-A on the ground of pendency of disciplinary proceedings pertaining to December 2013 vide T.E.C. No. 612018 despite completion of enquiry and submission of further representation dated 07-06-2020 ( acknowledged on 08-06-2020l, as arbitrary, illegal, unjust, vitiated by unreasonable delay and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently to declare that the Petitioner is entitled to have his claim considered and be promoted to the post of Regional Transport Officer or in the alternative be sanctioned Special Promotion Post Scale 1-A u,itl-r all incidental and related benefits duly holding that the proceedings pursuant to T.E.C. No. 6/2018 are deemed to have be dropped in the inrerest ofjustice.

¶23

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had earlier approached this court in W.P. No. 12587 of 2018 and by order dated 14-O4-2Ola, this court directed the first respondent to conclude the discipiinary proceedings in accordance with law and pass

¶24

appropriate^{orders thereon with in a period of six weeks from the date} of receipt^{of the copy of that order'}

¶25

3' Learned^{counsel of the petitioner furthersubmits that' in} spite^{of the said order of this court and though enquirywas concluded'} the^{respondentshave so far not passedany orders in disciplinary} proceedings.^{It is submitted' that the petitionerhas submitteda} representation^{on 07 -06-2022 by way of explanation to the Memo of the} first^{respondentdated 27'O2-2O22 ' but so far' the first respondent has} not taken^{any decision on the representation of the petitioner'}

¶26

This court^{on 04-03-2022' rrad directedthe learned} Government^{Pleader to get instructionsas to whether any orders have} been^{passedby the respondentspursuantto the explanation submitted} by the^{petitioneron 07'06' 2022 'lrarned Government Pleader submits} that^{the representationis pending and is not yet disposedof'}

¶27

Since^{morethantwo years have passedafter the petitioner} has made^{a representationand as the respondentNo.1 has not yet} taken^{any decision' this court deemsit fit and proper to direct the lirst} respondent^{todisposeof representation of the petitionerdated} O8-O6-2O22and^{pass{inalorders in the disciplinary proceedingswithin} a^{periodof 45 daysfrom the date of receipt of copy of this order'}

¶28

Writ petition 1S accordingly disposed of. Miscellaneous

¶29

applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed

¶30

SD /.T.KRISHNA^KUMAR DEPUTY^REGIST

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION^OFFICER

to ,t. ,n" Principal Secretary to Government' Transport' Roacis and Buildings DeDartment, rs^{secreiar-iai-si"i" oii"tunganaat Hyderabad-500022} ,. ffsiiaffi;'i^{L;;;;':i;ft i T"L-" guni siate Khai ratabad Hvderabad-} 3. The Secretary, 500004.^{Tribunalfor Disciplinary Proceedings' Governmentof}

¶35

Telanqana,^T.SHYderabad 4. i;; ic;i;^{cF Fbri s;RvtcEs-Iil,Hish court for the State of Telansanaat} Hvderabad lOUTl s 6'.;,"cc i;^{dir.V hnvrcHANDRAN,Advocate[oPUc]}

¶36

Two CD^CoPies 7. One spare^coPY S.A GJP \ k

¶37

HIGH COURT DATED:0610712022

¶38

ORDER

¶39

WP.No.11261 ot 2022

¶40

-.4
//' ^
,( @<br>(-
J
t)
t.) [ 2 Aris 2022 n
,t,
.,
-l -.-: _:=-::l

¶41

DISPOSING OF THE W.P

¶42

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶43

$,'

A. Shyam Naik v. State of Telangana, And 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A. Shyam Naik v. State of Telangana, And 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S. Bhaskar, And 17 Others Vs The Government of Telangana, And 4 Others

A.Venu Vs The State of Telangana

K.Bhagya Laxmi Vs The District Educational Officer

P.Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana

Parupelly Shekar Varma Vs The Singareni Collieries Company Limited.

Malothu Ramchander Vs The State of Telangana and 6 others