Disposed

Emmaji Mallanna v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Dec 2023WP/34021/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A constitutional bench directed Telangana State to take appropriate decision on inter-state transfer claims of three teachers within four weeks, noting Andhra Pradesh had already given consent, while issuing no directions for any final rejection.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Telangana State to take an appropriate decision on transfer claims within four weeks after verifying facts.

Emmaji Mallanna Vs The State of Telangana — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^33e3 ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF^DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND ANO TWENTY^THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE^{ALOK ARADHE} AND THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE^{ANIL KUMARJUKANTI}

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.34021 0F²⁰²³

¶7

Between:

¶8

Emmaii Mallanna, S/o,^{Shanker,Age. 44 years' Occ. JuniorLecturer.in} ailn'erce O/o. dov't.^{Junior College, Mantrdlayam,Kumool District, Andhra} Pradesh, Pin code^{- 518345.}

¶9

R. Raiesh Kumar, S/o,^{PrakashRao' Age. 39 years,Occ.JuniorLecturerin} - engli;'h, Olo. n.k.S.n. Govt. Junior eolbge, Karveti Nagaram, Chiftoor District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶10

3.P.Himabindu,D/o,LatePandu,Age.4Tyears,O-cc'Junior.Lecturerin - ptrvsicJ.Olo. br. V.S. Krishna Govt. Junior Cbllege, (Boys) Vishakhapatnam, Vishakhapatnam District,^{AndhraPradesh.}

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

AND

¶13

'l . The State of Telangana, Represented by its Chief Secretary^{to Govemment} Secretariat Building,^HYderabad

¶14

The State of^{Telangana, Representedby its Principal Secretary to} - Govemment EducatioriDepartment, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad

¶15

The State of^{Andhra Pradesh' Representedby its Chief Secretary to} -' Govemment AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati Guntur District, AP

¶16

The State of Andhra^{Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretaryto} Govemment Education^{Department,AP Secretariat'Velagapudi, Amaravati} Guntur District, AP

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article^{226 of the constitutionof lndiaprayingthat in the} circurnstances stated in^{the affidavit filed therewith,the High court may be} pleased to grant appropriate relief,^{more in the natureof a writ of Mandamus} under Article 226^{of lhe constltutionof India, declaring the action of the stateof}

¶19

Telangana/1'r^{Respondentin not according consentfor permanent} inter-state transfers^{in so far as the petitionersare concerned,in pursuanceof D.O. Letter} No.^{GADO1-APSROBIF(lNSTy26/2021 -MLO-2, dated23lOgl2O22addressed} by the^{3rd Respondentto the 1st Respondent,as arbitrary illegal,discriminatory,} malafide^{and unconstitutional violatingArticles 14. 16 and 2'l} of the Constitution of^{lndia, and issue consequential directions directingthe State} of Telangana/.lst Respondent^{to forthwith accord consent for permanent inter-state} transfers of the petitioners from the State of Andhra Pradesh to the State of Telangana in pursuance of^{D.O. Lefter No.} GADoI-APSR0BIF(lNSTy26/2021-MLO-2, dated 2310912022^{addressed by the 3rd Respondent, and further direct} the 3rd and 4th Respondents^{to relieve the Petitioners from} the^State of Andhra^pradesh immediately^{after receiving consent from the State of Telangana/1st} Respondent in^{pursuance of D.O. LetterNo.GADo1 -APSRoBIF (lNSTy26} t2O21-MLO-2, dated 2310912022^{addressed by the 3rd Respondentto the 1st} Respondent, and also direct^{the'l st and 2nd Respondents to allow the Petitioners} to^join in the State of Telangana^{at her respectiveunitimmediatelyafter} relieving the^petitioners from the^{State of AndhraPradesh.}

¶20

IA 10F 2023

¶21

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 direct^{the 1st and 2nd Respondents} to forthwith accord consent for permanent inter-state^{transferof the Petitioners} from Andhra^pradesh to Telangana state in pursuance of^D.O. Letter No. GAD01-APSR0B|F (1NSTy26/2O21-MLO-2 dated 23logl2o22,^{and also direct the} Respondents No.3 and 4 to relieve the^petitioners from the^{stateof Andhra} Pradesh after obtaining consent from Respondents No..1

¶22

¶23

and 2 in pursuance of D.O. Letter No. GADO1-APSR0BIF^{(lNST/26/2021-MLO-2,} daled 2310912O22 addressed to the^{1 st Respondent, and further direct the 1st and} 2nd Respondents to allow the^{Petitionerto join in the State of Telangana after} relieving the Petitioners from the^{stateof Andhra Pradesh, pending disposalof} the Writ Petition.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRI P. V. KRISHNAIAH}

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos. 1 & 2: SRI N. RAMU'} GP FOR SERVICES -^{lll (TS)}

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos.3 & 4: GP FOR SERVICES} -^{lll (AP)} The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶27

¶28

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEFJUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON'BLE SHRT JUSTICE ANIL KT]MAR JUKANTI WRIT PETITION No.3 4021of 2023

¶29

ORDER:1per the Hon'ble the Chief Jusrice Alok Aradhe)

¶30

Mr. P.V. Krishnaiah, leamed counsel appears for the petitioners.

¶31

Mr. N. Ramu, learned Government pleader for Services-Ill appears for respondent Nos. I and 2.

¶32

With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.

¶33

In this Writ Petition, the petitionerc inter alia have prayed for the following relief:

¶34

"For the rqsons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is therefore prayed that this Hon,ble High Court may be pleased to grant appropriate relief, more in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constirution of lndia, declaring the action of the State of Telangana./le Respondent in not according consent for permanent inter-state transfers in so far as the Petitioners are concemed, in pursuance of D.O. Letter No. cADol-ApSROBIF (INST)D6I202l -MLO-2 dated 23.09.2022 addressed by the 3.d Respondent to the l"' Respondent, as arbitrary illegal, discriminatory, mala fide and unconstitutional violating Artictes 14, l6 and 2l of the Constitution of India, and issue oonsequential directions directing the State of Telangana,/l', Respondent to forthwith accord consent for permanent inter_state Aansfers of the

¶35

CJ & JAK, J w.P.No.3aO2I of 2023

¶36

¶37

Petitioners from the State of^{AndhraPradesh10 the State of} Telangana in pursuancr of D.O. LeRcr^{No. CADOI-} APSROBIF (INSTy26/2021-Mt0-2,^{dated 23.09.2022} addressed by the 3'd Respondent,^{and further direct the 3'd and} 4s Respondents to relieve the^{Petitionersfrom the Stateof} Andhra Pradesh immediately^{after receiving consent fromthe} State of Telangana/ls^{Respondentin pursuanceof D.O. Letter} No.GADOl-APSROBIF(INSTy26/2O21-MLO-? dated 23.09.2022 addressed by the^{3dRespondent to the l'r} Respondent, and also^{direct the [s and 2nd Respondents to} allow the Petitioners^{to join in theStateof Telangana at their} respctive units immediately^{after relievingthe Petitiones} from the State ofAndhra^Pradesh."

¶38

Learned counsel for^{the petitioners submits that} W.P.No.33340 of 2023^{involvingsimilar issue has been} disposed of by a^{DivisionBench of this Courtvide order dated} 08.12.2023 and this Writ^{Petition also be disposedof on the} same terms and directions.

¶39

The aforesaid aspect^{ofthe matterhas not been disputed}

¶40

by the leamed counsel^{for the respondents.}

¶41

In view of^{aforesaid submission, the Writ Petition is}

¶42

disposed of with^{the followingdirections.}

¶43

D Taking into^{accountthe nature of relief, in our} considered opinion,^{no purpose wouldbe served in} keeping the^{Writ Petition pending or admitting it}

¶44

¶45

CJ & JAX, J w.P.No.3aO2l or 2023

¶46

¶47

or calling for the counter etc., rather than ends of justice would be met if the Writ Petition at rhis juncture would be disposed ofdirecting respondent Nos.l and 2 to take appropriate decision on the claim of the petitioners for accepting the transfer from the State of Andhra Pradesh to the State of Telangana for which the State of Andhra Pradesh has already given its consent.

¶48

ii) Let respondent Nos.l and 2 take an appropriate decision, after due verification of the facts at the earliest, preferably, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶49

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

¶50

closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶51

¶52

To,

¶53

SD/.V.KAVITHA ASSISTANT REGTSTRAR /ffRUE COPY// . r. sEcno&toFFtcER

¶54

The Chief Secretarv to Government, State of Telangana, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad

¶55

2' The Principar Secretary to Government Education Department, state of Telangana, Secretariat 6uilding, nyderabat --^---''

¶56

The chief secretarv to Govemment, state of Andhra pradesh, Ap Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati Cuntur Olstri'ci A.p.^{' ""-"''}

¶57

4 Thq. Principal Secretary to Govemment Education Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Ap se6retariat, vetagapuoi, emiiivati cir;tui Di;irict].p:'

¶58

One CC to SRt p. V. KR|SHNA|AH, Advocate tOpUCl

¶59

--bla^

¶60

Two CCs to GP for Services-lll (TS), High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶61

Fwo CCs to GP for Services-lll (AP), High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati Guntur District. {OUTI

¶62

Two CD Copies

MP GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:1811212023

1 ttE STAT
(
q
7'<br>o [) j
D 2 i 0r[ 2023
:i /i
t
i
I
-ORDER

¶68

WP.No.34021 ol2O23

¶69

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶70

(9 qi\o
1A

Emmaji Mallanna v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Emmaji Mallanna 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Primary Fishermen Cooperative Society Limited Vs The State of Telangana

G.Jalandhar, Vs High Court of Andhra Pradesh High Court Buildings

Mothukuri Asherwadam, Khammam Dist Vs Settlement Officer and R.D.O., Khammam Dist and 7 Ot

Ammatul Subhan Asra Vs State of Telangana

Mr. Mohd. Ghouse Vs Telangana State Financial Corporation

M/s. Surya Seeds Limited, Vs The Union of India