The High Court of Telangana dismissed Writ Petition No. 32615 of 2016 filed by an employee of IRDAI without merits, as the petitioner withdrew the petition. No substantive questions regarding the arbitrary staff regulations were adjudicated.
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.
[3311 I
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
WRIT PETITION NO: 32615 OF 2016
Between:
Ms.Jyothi Bhagat, D/o: P.N.Sharma, Aged 40 years, Assistant General Manager, lnsurance Regulatory and Development Authority of lndia, Parishrama Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under A(icle 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 an order, direction or writ more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring, (a) the lnsurance Regulatory and Development Authority of lndia Staff (Officers and other employees) Regulations, 2016 issued by the 2nd respondent authority are arbitrary, illegal, null and void, in derogatory to the statutory mandate prescribed under the provisions of lnsurance Regulatory and Development Act, 1999 apart from violative of fundamental rights guarantee under constitution of lndia. 2 (b) in particular, the'regulations 2 (1),2 (3), 15,24, 25, 27,32(B), 33 (9) (b), 35(2), 72 & 75 of the lnsurance Regu[atory and Development Authority of lndia Staff (Officers and other ernployees) Regulations, 20'16 issued by the 2nd respondent authority are wholly arbitrary, illegal, null and
void apart fronr v'ol rtrve of fundamental rights guaranteed urrde- constitution of lndia more particLrla ly Art.'14, 1g & 21 of the constitut on of lndra (c) the circular issued by the 2ncl a respondent in Ref. IRDA/ADIVN/pl:FyctRl176/ogl2o16, DATED 01.09.2016 as arbitrary, i egal, null and void and a3ainst the provisions of IRDA Act. 1{199, c is:riminatory, and viorative of funciamentar rig hts guaranteed under constitution < f lndia. (d) and consequenfly tc set aside the lnsurance Regulatory and Dt v<>topment Authority of rndia Staff 'cfficers and other employees) Re,lu ations, 2016 and consequent c rcular in Ref. IRDA/ADMN/PERtC I Rr 1 76109/201 6, DATED Oi .09.20.1 6
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2O16(V IP MP. NO:40 360 0F 2016)
Petition :nder section i51 cpc praying that in the cirourrstances stated in the affidavit filec i.r support of the petition, the High court rnay, be pleased to suspend the operatic n of the lnsurance Regulatory and Develoom,:nt Authority of lndia staff (officers ard other emproyees) Regurations, 2016, pending disposar of the above w'it pe1 tion and to pass such other order or ordr)rs as this Hon,bre court deem frt and pr tper in the interest of justice.
l.A. NO:2 oF 2016(U PMP. NO: 403 61 0F 2016)
Petitror under Section .1 S.1 CpC praying that i I rhe circumstances stated in the affidav t fired in support of the petition the lilh court may be pleased to stay of arr further proceedings pursuanl to the circurar in Ref. IRDA/ADMN/PER/(lllV'l 76109/2016, DATED 01.09.201{1, per di.rg,lisposat of the above writ petition a rd to pass such other order or orriers as this Hon'ble court deem fit and proper,r t1e interest of justice.
Counsel for the Petit oner: SRl. BALAJT MEDAMALLT
Counsel for the Resp ondent No.1: SRl. MUKARJEE FOR GADt pRAVEEN KUMAR DEPUTY SOLICI C)R (;ENERAL OF INDIA
Counsel for the Resp ondent No.2: SRt. M. V. SURESH(NOT pfIESENT)
The Court made the I :llowing: ORDER
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI
WRIT PETITION No.32615 of 2O16
ORDER: (Per tte Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhugan)
Mr. Balaji Medamalli, learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted in writing that he is under instructions of his client to withdraw the writ petition
withdrawal. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed
SD/. MOHD.SANAULLAHAN ASSISTANTREGIS
/TTRUE COPY//
SECTION FICER
To'1. On. CC to Sri. Balaji Medamalli, Advocate-[OPUC] i. il; cc i"sri.nll. V.'Suresh,AdvocatetoPu^cl.. 5: 6;; cc 65;i. caoi pravitn rlmii,oe'putv S6licitor General of lndia toPUCl
TJ GJP
HIGH COURT
DATED:07106'2023
ORDER
--4=
,9 ''' rrfS o
{ .,-. /<br>l./.
llY
rl)i.) tt tu\ 1$B
', i)
:.<br>":-' .12
---: ri-,
WP.No.32615 of 2016
DISMISSING HE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT CCSTS.
q
f{r ^.0-
zc72
) :,4
Ms. Jyothi Bhagat
Union Of India
Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India
UJJAL BHUYAN
N.TUKARAMJI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
