Disposed

S.Gyaneshwar Giri v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC10 Apr 2023WP/4250/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the withholding of security deposits under various contracts, the High Court directed petitioners to submit detailed representations regarding contract specifics. The respondents were directed to consider the representations and refund deposits or provide reasons otherwise.

What did the court decide?

Directions to petitioners to submit detailed representations on contracts; respondents to consider and refund deposits or provide reasons.

S.Gyaneshwar Giri Vs The State of Telangana — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^321e ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE TENTH^{DAY OF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND AND^{TWENTY THREE}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SMT.JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI}

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:^{4250 OF 2023}

¶7

Between:

¶8

S.Gyaneshwar Giri, S/o.^{Parameshwar,Aged52.ye3irs,Occ- Business'R/o'} H.N6. 7-29, Narketpally^{Postand Mandal, Nalgonda District}

¶9

Venkataramana^'sociat Service^{Society. Rep} !V^{itsPresident'} S.Venkataramana S/o. Parameshwar,^{Aged 52 years, Occ- tsuslness' K/o.} H.No. 7-29, Narketpally Post^{and Mandal, NalgondaDistrtct'}

¶10

. ...PETITIONERS

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana,^{Rep. by its PrincipalSecretary Transport} Deoartment. BRK{Bhavan,^{Tahk Bund Road.Hyderabad}

¶13

Tel'angana State Road^{Transport Corporation, RTC X Roads, Bus Bhavan'} HvdeAbad, rep. bv its Managing^Director.

¶14

S. fie Regioriat Man'ager,^{T S.R T:C} ,^{Nalgonda Region,.Nalgonda, Telangana} State.

¶15

+. iteFersonnel Officer,^{O/o. Regional Manager, T.S.R'T C , Nalgonda Region'} Nalgonda.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article²²⁶ of^{lhe constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavitfiledtherewith,the High court may be} pleased to issue a writ, order or direction,^{more particularlyonein the natureof} writ of Mandamus declaring^{the action of the respondentswithholdingsecurity} deposits in respect of^{variouscontractsawarded to the petitioners as bad,} arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional^{and violationof principlesof naturaljustice,} consequently direct the^{respondentsto refund the security deposit whichwere} made by the^{petitioners under variouscontract with interest'}

¶18

IA NOi 1 0F²⁰²³

¶19

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 Respondents^{to refund the security deposits forthwithto the petitionerswhich} were made^{in various contracts awardedto the petitioners in Nalgonda Region} pending disposal of the^{mainwrit petition}

¶20

Counsel for the^{Petitioners:SRI T.SUDHAKAR REDDY} Corn""f for the^{Respondents:SRIGADDAM SRINIVAS, SC FOR TSRTC}

¶21

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

¶22

THE HONOURABLE^{SMT JUSTICE P'MADHAVIDEVI}

¶23

W.P.No. 4250 of 2023

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

In this writ petition, the^{petiLioners are seekinga writ of} mandamus declaring^{theaction of therespondentsin} ivithholding securiS- deposits^{Ln respecI of the various contracts} awarded to the^{petitioners,as illegal,arbitraryand consequently} to direct thc respondents^{to refund the security deposit and to} pass such oLher order or^orders.

¶26

Lcarned counsel for the^{petitionerssubmittedthat thc} pelitioncrs have be<--n awzrrdcd^{various conlracts nearly 30} contracts and the^{petitionershave made security depositsas} per the requiremcnts of the contracts. It is^{submittedthat the} petitioners have successfully executed the contracts,^{but even} after the lapse of contract period, the^{petitionershave not been} refunded the security deposits. The petitioners claims to^have made several representations to the respondents for^{refund of} l-he security dcposits and sincc no reply was given nor^thc security deposits were refundcd, the prescnt writ^{petition has} been filed.

¶27

¶28

PMD.J w.P-No 42sO of 2O2 3

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the specific attention of this Court to the details of the contracts awarded to the petitioners which are from page Nos.2O to 84 wherein the name of the petitioners in certain contracts is also mentioned. It is further submitted that the petitioners have not having the slips of the security deposits made by them and therefore, they could not file the same before this Court.

¶30

Learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioners, in their representations, have not given the details of contracts nor the amounts of security deposits to be refunded to them and therefore, the authorities could not have taken any action.

¶31

In view of the above submissions of both the parties, this Court direct the petitioners to make fresh representations to the respondents giving details of the contracts entered into by them and executed by them and on receipt of such representations, the respondents shall consider the same and refund the security deposits to the petitioner, wherever it is due to them and if for any reason, any security deposit cannot be refunded to the petitioners, the reasons for the same shall be intimated to \

¶32

¶33

PtfD,J w.P.No. 42sO of 2O23

¶34

vg-/

¶35

the petitioners. The petitioners are permitted to make the representations with a period of two weeks from [he date of receipt of a copy of this order and the respondents are directed to dispose of the representation within a period of two (21 months thereafter.

¶36

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall

¶37

be no order as to costs.

¶38

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ

¶39

petition, shall stand closed.

¶40

, SD/-A.V.S. PRASAD Assr;iAfii;crfan /

//TRUE^COPY//

SECTION^OFFICER

To 1. Tha Princioal Secretary,^{Transport Department' BRKR Bhavan' Tank Bund} 2 +ffi ,^,, Xi*:,'#Bfi3lir"J ]iffi 3?"" Road r ra n s po rt c o rp o ra tio n,^{Rr c X} 3 +r?8'-iti:^{X' MJfrlr5'lili'Rifc, N alsondaReg ion'NaIs o nd a' re. a ns-a na} 4 ?lt?""r".,^{officer, o/o. RegionatManager, T.s.R.T.c-, Nalgonda Region'} ( H#"#kBElEi8Bl'$ss.fi5R3,"sa.,"se"+".[T"'3""t

¶45

7 Two CD^CoPies

PSK. LS

HIGH^COURT

DATED:1^{0 10412023}

ORDER

WP.No.4250^{of 2023}

' re,
C
1B APfl 2[8
[)
_t:

o ..r$

¶53

DISPOSING^{OF THE WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT^COSTS.

¶54

o)cd'E

¶55

S.Gyaneshwar Giri v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Gyaneshwar Giri 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

Om Sri Sairam Electricals Vs Northern Power Distribution Company Ltd.

N. Raghavan Nair Vs V.C. and M.D., A.P. Housing Board and 14 Oths

M/s. Bnju Metals and Alloys Industrial Pvt. Ltd. Vs Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission

Kantilal , KantilalSugandhi Vs The State of Telangana and another

Mirza Jahangir Baig Vs The State of Telangana

Jilakari Madhava Rao Vs The State of Telangana