Disposed

Echhareshwara J.V. v. Indian Institute of Insurance Surveyors and Loss Assessors (Promoted by Irda, Government of India)

Telangana HC4 Dec 2023WP/34837/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging a suspension order, the High Court directed the petitioner to submit a fresh representation with grievances. Based on this, the respondent must consider the application, grant a personal hearing, and pass appropriate orders within prescribed timelines.

What did the court decide?

Appropriate order directing respondent No.3 to give personal hearing and pass orders within two weeks after considering petitioner's representation.

Echhareshwara J.V. Vs Indian Institute of Insurance… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

132521

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 34837 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

Echhareshwara J.V., s/o Veerabhadrappa, aged about 34^years, occ. Surveyor and Loss Assessor, rlo 1082,¹ st Main, 1st Cross S.N[alingappa Layout, Devangere, Kamataka

¶9

..,PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 lndian lnstitute of lnsurance Surveyors and Loss Assessors^(Promotedby IRDA, Government of lndia), rep. by its Chairman Regd. Office^6-1-73,Flat No. 104 and 106 1st floor, Sayeed Plaza, Lakdikapool,Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The President, lndian lnstitute of lnsurance Surveyors^{and Loss Assessors} (Promoted by IRDA, Government of lndia), 6-1-73, Flat No. 104 and 106, 15t floor, Sayeed Plaza, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad.

¶13

3 The Vice-President, lndian lnstitute of lnsurance^Surveyor and^Loss Accessors, Bangalore.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution^{of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed therewith, the High Court maybe} pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more^{particularlyone in} the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to^{declare the action of the respondent No.1} herein in issuing the suspension order dt.^{29-7 -2022 without considering the} letter dt. 1O-2-2O22 submitted by me before the^{3rd respondent herein,as being} illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional^{and consequentlyset asidethe} same.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶17

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 suspend the impugned suspension order dt. 2g-7 -2022, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt M.PRASHANT KUMAR

¶19

Counsel for the Respondents: M/s. HIMAGIRI SANGHI, SC FOR lllSLA

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

'al

¶22

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶23

WRIT PETITION N o. 34837 0F 2022

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondents.

¶26

2. The prayer as sought for by the petitioner in the present writ petition reads as under:

¶27

"To issue an order writ or direction more particularly one in nature of writ of MANDUMUS to declare the action of respondent No.1 herein in issuing the suspension order dated 29.07.2022 without considering the letter dated 10.02.2022 submitted by him before the 3d respondent herein, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the same."

¶28

PERUSED THE RECORD

¶29

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner refers to the memo dated 07.10.2022 and submits to this Court that as per the direction of this Court dated 06.09.2022, personal notices have been issued to the respondents and proof of service of notice has been filed along with the memo duly enclosing the copy of track report Nos.12StOO6t9,1251005461 and 125100550.

¶30

il 7^

¶31

¶32

Srrv.J W.P.No.34837 of 2022

¶33

Further, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits to this Court that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition aggrieved by the impugned suspension order dated 29.07.2022 passed by respondent No.1, and contends that though the issue pertains to the year 2022, no interim order had been passed in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner had not made any representation explaining petitioner's grievance against the suspenslon order dated 29.07.2022 to respondent No.3 till as on date, but only pleads that the petitioner should be given an opportunity of personal hearing and then the 3'd respondent could take a decision in the matter.

¶34

Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the present writ petition is dasposed of directing the petitioner to submit a representation afresh to respondent No.3 herein by pufting forth his grievance as averred in the present writ petition, since admittedly, the petitioner has not made any representation to respondent No.3 in pursuance to the suspension order dated 29.O7.2022 ttll as on date, within a period of one

¶35

SN,J W.P.No.34837 of 2022

¶36

---''{ ",. /

¶37

week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and upon respondent No.3 receiving said representation submitted by the petitioner against the suspension order dated 29.07.2022, respondent No.3 sha!! consider the same, within a period of two weeks thereafter, in accordance to law, by giving an opportunity of personat hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders duly communicating the decision to the petitioner, since admittedly the order impugned dated 29.O7.2022, indicates that it is an ex-parte order passed for an indefinite period. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶38

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶39

SD/- P. PADMANABHA REDDY ASSISTANT^REGI

¶40

//TRUE COPY//

¶41

SECTION^OFFICER

¶42

To, 1 The Chairman, lndian lnstitute of lnsurance Survevors and Loss Assessors (Promoted bv IRDA, eoulin-tit""nt^{oi inoial'RegO'.C'ffice6-1-73'Flat No '104} I# i bii Giiroor,^{Saveed-ilaza,Lakdikapool' Hvderabad'}

¶43

'lliiihih;at?'til,:*;llllrua:u:.%:Hi?,$l:'b?T"t',%"":?n ii#' 5;v;;d^{pulu, t-,t'o itt"pool' H.vderabad,} - - .-- -

¶44

1. The Viie-President,^{tn-diari tnstitlte of lnsurance Surveyor and Loss} Accessors, Bangalore.

¶45

o 6i,?cC i"' 5ni^{tlr. F nns nnr'rr KU MAR' 4d-'9q?l'.t9 P u-cl} -' i 5ll! 6d i;^{M7;. iiiMecriii'sAr'rcnt, sc FoR rrrslA [oPUC]} 6. Two^{CD CoPies}

BSR GJP $

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0411212023

ORDER

WP.No.34837 of 2022

1 Y\E brA/(: o
(
tt 9 ''<br>:l
t)
o O3 JAN 2[.24
rt,',

Desp41C?_

¶53

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION,

¶54

WITHOUT COSTS

¶55

a3
AJ

Echhareshwara J.V. v. Indian Institute of Insurance Surveyors and Loss Assessors (Promoted by Irda, Government of India)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Echhareshwara J.V. v. Indian Institute of Insurance Surveyors and Loss Assessors (Promoted by Irda, Government of India)

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

Guntoju Sadguna Chary Vs D. Venkateswarlu

Vemparala Rks Sharma Vs Sri N.Sridhar

Dr. M.A. Saiff Ali Vs Dr. Divvela Mohan Das

V.Venkateswarlu Reddy Vs The Government of Telangana

Aouf Bin Sayeed Bin Siddig Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Mohd Aamer, Vs The Convenor-Sw-Ii