Disposed

Akkala Shekar v. the Superintendent of Police

Telangana HC22 Apr 2022WP/20172/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition alleging illegal allotment. It directed respondents to consider the petitioner's pending appeal and representation regarding retention in Mancherial district within six weeks, proceeding in line with earlier similar orders.

What did the court decide?

Directions to respondents to consider the petitioner's appeal and representation and pass appropriate orders within six weeks.

Akkala Shekar Vs the Superintendent of Police — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT^HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 20172 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

Akkala Shekar, S/o. Ivlallaiah, aged About 37^years, AR^{PC No. 3843,0/o} District Armed Reserve, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Superintendent of Police, Adilabad, Adilabad District.

¶12

The Superintendent of Police, Komaram Bheem Asifabad^{Distric.,Asifabad}

¶13

The Director General of Police, Telangana State,^Hyderabad.

¶14

The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary,^Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad,

¶15

,..RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India^{prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the^High Court^{may be} pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of l/andamus declaring the impugned Proc.No. HO/HO/AD/KOMA/POCO/0642, dated 21-12-2021^{issued by the 1st respondent} and its consequential Proc.No.HO/D1lKOIMA/POCO/0041, dated^31-12-2021 issued by the 2nd respondent is as illegal, arbitrary and unjust^{and violative of} Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently^{set-aside the} same and hold that the petitioner is entitled for allotment i^{retention in [t4ancherial} District with all consequential and attendant benefits.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that^{in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the^{HighCourt may be pleasedto direct} the respondents to consider the case of the^{petitionerfor allotting/ retaining in} Mancherial district by disposing of the appeal^{petition filed by the petitioner dated} 29-12-2021 readwith 1-4-2022 against the impugned^{Proo.No.HO/HO/AD/KO} MA/POCO/0642, dated 21-12-2021 issued by the 1st^{respondentand its} consequential Proc.No. HO/D'1lKOMA/POCO/0O41,^{dated 31-12-2021 issuedby} the 2nd respondent,^pending disposal of the above^{writ petition.}

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. A.TIRUPATHI^GOUD

¶20

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME^{/AGPFORSERVICES'l} The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20172 of 2022

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

Heard leamed counsel for the petitioner and leamed Assistant Government Pleader for Services-l and perused the material on record.

¶24

Learned counsel for both sides report that in similar circumstances, this Court passed orders in W.P.No.36688 of 2021 and batch dated28.12.2021 and, in terms thereof, this writ petition may be disposed of.

¶25

Therefore, recording the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel on either side, following the order in W.P.No.36688 of 2021 and batch dated 28.12.2021, in terms thereof, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's appeal dated 29.12.2021 and representation dated 0l .04.2022 and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs

¶26

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed

¶27

SD/.I.NAGALAKSHMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY// rtr SECTION OFFICER

¶28

To, 1. The Superintendent Of Police, Adilabad, Adilabad^District. 2. The Suberintendent of Police, Komaram^{BheemAsifabadDistrict., Asifabad.}

¶29

@tJ

¶30

The Director General of Police, Telangana State, Hyderabad. 4 The Principal becietarV, Home Department, State of TelangJna, Secretariat, //' Hyderabad, A One CC to SRl. A.TIRUPATHI GOUD, Advocate [OPUC] b Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] 7 Two CD Copies. o One Spare Copy. GB gbr {

¶31

HIGH COURT

¶32

DATED:2210412022

¶33

ta 0 6 JUN 20?2 o
.>
*
t

ORDER

WP.No.20172 of 2022

DISPOSING OF THE WP

WITHOUT COSTS.

/fo-r,r

Akkala Shekar v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akkala Shekar v. the Superintendent of Police

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

Sarikona Sateesh Kumar Vs The District Educational Officer

G. Padmavathi Vs The State of Telangana

J. Prabhakar Reddy Vs The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation

Mettupalli Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana

Pothuganti Jyothi Vs The State of Telangana

Kura Nagarani Vs the State of Telangana