Allowed

Garla Sreenu v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC1 Nov 2023WP/30209/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In WP No. 30209 of 2023, the petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the High Court to consider a representation for appointment under the Land loser quota. The High Court directed the respondents to look into the matter and pass orders within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

The Court directed the respondents to look into the petitioner's representation and dispose of it by passing appropriate orders within three weeks.

Garla Sreenu Vs The State of Telangana — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^321e ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF^NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE^{P.MADHAVI DEVI}

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 30209 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Garla Sreenu, Son of late Garla^{Veerabhadraiah, Aged about 37 years,Occ.} Agriculture, Resident of^H.No.'l -289l¹ ,^{Pandurangapuram,Paloncha,} Khammam District,

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana,^{Represented by its PrincipleSecretary,Energy} Department, T.S. Secretariat,^Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The Telangana State Power Generation^{Corporation Limited,Represented by} its Chairman and Managrng Director,^{Somajiguda, Hyderabad.}

¶13

3 The Director (HR), TS GENCO,^{Somajiguda, Hyderabad.}

¶14

4 The District Collector, Bhadradri^{KothagudemDistrict, at Bhadradri.}

¶15

5 The Chief Engineer,^(O &^{lvl),KTPS, V and Vl Stage, Paloncha, Khammam} District.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of^{the Conslitutionof lndia praying that 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 natureof} Writ of Mandamus, directing the^respondents to^{considerthe case of the} petitioner for appointment in any suitable^post in KTPS Stages V^{and Vl} Paloncha in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98^{lrrigation (Projects Wing) Department dated} 1510411986 and G.O.Ms.No.266 lrrigation^{and CAD (Projects Wing) Department} dated 19/09/1 994 as^per the enquiry^{report of Tahsildar dated18lOSl201B.}

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{praying that in the circumstances stated} in the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition, the} High^{Court maybe pleasedto} direct the respondents to^pass orders^{on the representation submittedby the} petitioner dated 19lOOl2O23, pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶20

Counsel for^{the Petitioner:SRI P. RAVI SHANKER}

¶21

Counsel for^{the Respondent No.1: GPFOR ENERGY}

¶22

Counsel for^{the Respondent No.2 to 5: Ms. V. UMA DEVI,} SC FOR TS GENCO Ltd.,

¶23

The Court^{made the following: ORDER}

¶24

I I

¶25

-7

¶26

THE IIONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI

¶27

w.P.No.3O2O9 ot2023

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

In this Writ Petition, the petitioner IS seeking a direction to the respondents to consider and dispose of the representation made by the petitioner dated 19.O6 .2023 for appointment under Land ioser Quota and to pass such other order or orders.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Tahsildar, Palvoncha addressed a letter dated 18.05.2O18 giving a report about the land of the petitioner to an extent of Ac.2.OO gts. in Sy.No.ll7 ll, situated at Suraram Village of Palvoncha Mandal to be under utilization of KTPS agency, Palvoncha in the process of link up the KTPS Ash pond canal to the Kinnerasani vaagu and that the remaining land to an extent of Ac.3.OO gts is in peaceful possession of the individua-l.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, inspite of such a report, the respondents have not taken any action and therefore, the petitioner has made a fresh

I I

.rc

:11

representation dated^{19.06.2023 for relief of appointment} under Land loser^quota.

¶37

Ms. V. Uma Devi,^{learned Standing counsel for TS} GENCO Ltd.,^{is also heard on behalf of the respondents}

¶38

Having regard to^{the fact the there is a reportof the} Tahsildar, Palvoncha^{dated 18.O5.2018and also the} collector's report^{dated L2.12.2O2O infavour of the} petitioner, this Court^{deems it {it and proper to rlirect the} respondents to look^{into the same and dispose of the} representation of^{the petitionerby passing appropriate} orders thereon,^{withina periodof three (03) weeks from the} date of receipt^{of a copy of this order.}

¶39

Accordingly, this^{writ petition is disposed of' There} shall be no order^{as to costs.}

¶40

Miscellaneous petitions,^{if any, pendingin this writ}

¶41

petition, shall stand^closed.

¶42

SD/. T.^J AY,[S ASSISTANT^REGIS RAR //TRUE^COPY// SECTION FICER

¶43

To, I The Principle^{Secretary, Energy Department'The Stateof Telangana'T S} Secretariai,^HYderabad'

¶44

2 The Chairman cJ"n;r'Jffi ' c-; tpoiriion^{andtvlanaglnq} r-Irnt"o,^Director' som aj^The is ud^Telangana a H vd e ra bad'^{State Power}

¶45

¶46

¶47

9 ]lr.^{Director (HR), TS GENCOSomajiguda} , Hvderabad. 1. l|.le^{utstnct Uo ector, Bhadradri} Kothagudem District, at Bhadradri. 5 If" Chief Ensineer, (O & M), XIpS, v-anJVi 5;'g", patoncha, Khammam District.

¶48

One CC to SRt P. RAVI-SHANKER, Advocate tOpUCl 7.^.one CC to A,4s. V. UMA.DE_V|, SC FoR rs cEirtoLta., topucl 3. IWB 3$tt "": FoR ENERGv, Hisr-, iourtioi t'r,u-sLi" 6ir"l#sana. [our] BN GJP "-

HIGH COURT

DATED:0111112023

ORDER

WP.No.30209 of 2023

-, Be S rAIe
',,<
q
l
az
,j 1 5 N[\l 2tl2]
al
*
/)6 9 ot1C<br>

¶54

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

Garla Sreenu v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Garla Sreenu 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Siddharth Vs The State of Telangana

Pachipala Venkata Lakshmi Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Mehboob Vs The State of Telangana

Vaddepally Satyanarayana Vs The State of Telangana

R.P. Rao Vs The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation

Mohammed Salauddin Vs The State of Telangana