Allowed

Kema Venkateshwar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC14 Sept 2023WP(TR)/4571/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the State authorities to consider the petitioner's claim for transfer from a Hindi Medium school to a Telugu Medium school, citing discrimination against a similarly situated employee who was previously granted such benefits.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioner's transfer claim within six weeks, setting aside the previous rejection order.

Kema Venkateshwar Vs The State of Telangana — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³³⁰³ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH^{DAYOF SEPTEMBER} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{J. SREENIVASRAO}

¶6

WP(TR ) NO:4571 OF 2017

¶7

Between

¶8

Kema Venkateshwar, S/o. Gangaram.^{Aged 47 years,OccSchool Assistant} (Bio-Science), Government High School, Easgaon No.5, Kaghaznagar ir/andal, Adilibad District R/o.^{Kaghaznagar,Adilabad District}

¶9

...pEITtoNER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana,^{Rep, by its Principal Seg9-l?!yrSchoolEducation} Deoartment. Telanoana Secretariat,^{Hyderabad 500022}

¶12

2 Th6 Director of Sch-bol^{Education,Teldngana State, Saifabad, Hyderabad} 500004.

¶13

The District Educational Otficer,^{Adilabad,Achlabad Dlstrict50.4R0EK.NDENrs}

¶14

Petition under Arlicle 226^{of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the}

¶15

circumstances stated in^{the affidavitfiled therewith'the High Courtmay be} pleased to declare the orders^passed by the^{3rd respondentvide proceedings} Rc,No B//3105/2015,^{dated, 8-6-2015 in rejectingthe requestof the applicantto} consider his case^{for transfer to Telugu Medium schoolsfrom Hindi Medium} school as school Assistant^{(Bio-Science)as was done in the case of the similarly} situated^personsby extending^{the benefit of the brders passed bv the HonbleHigh} court in W.P. No.6612/2008,^{dated28.3.2008 as illegal, arbitrary,discriminatory,} unjust and violation of^{princrples of naturaljustice and set asidethe orders passed} by the 3rd respondent^{vide proceedings Rc.No.B1l3105/2015, dated.8-6-2015} and consequently direct the^{respondentsto considerthe caseof the applicant for} transfer to Telugu^{Medium schoolsas school Assistant (Bio- science)from Hindi} Medium school forthwithⁱⁿ tlre^interestof .iustice

¶16

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that^{in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High^{Court may le pleasedto} vacate the interim Orders dated 30-04-2015 in W.P(TR)^{No. 4571 of 2017 (O.4.}

¶18

No. 1978 of 2015) and to dismiss the Writ^Petition

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S.^{SURENDER REDDY}

¶20

Counsel for Respondents: GP^{FOR SERVICESI}

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

¶23

uIRIT PETITTON(TR) No.4571 of 2Ol7

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This writ petition (TR) is filed seeking the following

¶26

relief:

¶27

"to C-eclare the orders passed bg the 3d respondent uide proceedings Rc.No.B/ 31O5/ 2O15 dated 8.6.2O 1 5 in rejecting the request of the applicant to consider his case for transfer to Telugu Medium schools from Hindi Medium school as School Assistanl (Bio Science) es u)as done in thb case of the sinilarla situated persons by ertending the benefit of the orders passed bg the Hon'ble High court in W.P.No. 6612/2OO8, dated 28.3.2OO8 as illegal, arbitrary, discrirninatory, unjust, and uiolation of pinciples of natural^justice and set aside the orders passed bg the 3d respondent uide proceedings Rc.No.B 1 / 3105/ 201 5 dated 8.6.2O 15 and consequentlg direct the respondents to consider the case of the applicant for transfer to Telugu Medium schools as School.Assistanl (Bio Science) from Hindi Mediunt school forthu.tith in the inte re st of^justice... "

¶28

The petitioner, initially filed Original Application No.4196 of 2015, before the Andhra Pradesh Administra.tive Tribunal, Hyderabad, questioning the irnpugned proceedings issued by respondent No.3 vide Rc.No.B/3105/2015, dated:8.6.2015 in rejecting the claim of the petitioner to consider his case to transfer frorn Hindi Mediurn school to Telugu Mediurn school as School Assistant (Bio -Science) as was done in the case

¶29

¶30

of the similarly situated^{persons byextending the} benefit of the orders^{passed by thisCt>urt in} W.P.No.66 12 of 2OO8, dated^{28.03.2008 asillegal,} arbitrary, and discriminative^{and violationof principles} of natrlral^justice. On abolition^{of A.P.A.T.,Flyclerabad,} O.A. was transferred to this^{Court and renumtteredas} W.P.(TR) No.4571 of 2017.

¶31

Heard Sri S.Surender Reddy,^{learned counsel for} the petitioner and Iearned^{Assistant Govt:rnrnent} Pleader for Services-I for respondents.

¶32

Learned counsel for ttre^{petitionersubmitsthat} petitioner studied his S.S.C. in^{Telugu rneditLm with} Telugu as First language,^{Intermediateand Degreealso} in Telugu medil.m. ThereaJter,^{he completed his B.Ed'} in Hindi medium. Basing^{on the eligibility, the p':titioner} was initially appointed as^{SGT in Hindi medium in DSC,} 2OOO and posted through^{proceedings dated1 1.11.2O0O} issued by respondent No.3.^{Thereafter, he was p rornoted} as School Assistant^{(Bio-science)in Hindi Mediurn and} was posted at Government High^{School, Easgaon No.5,}

¶33

¶34

Kagaznagar Mandal, Adilabad District vide proceedings dated 02.11.201O. Though, the petitioner is eligible to be promoted in Telugu Medium, the respondents have promoted the petitioner in Hindi medium. He further submits that, the then unified Government of Andhra Pradesh had issued Memo No.2654/ser-I[-l/2006, dated 22.OA.2006 perrnitting the Secondar5r Grade Teachers(S.G.T.) who are working in Hindi Medium Sctrool to consider for promotion to the post of School Assistant in Telugu Medium. Pursr.rant to the said Memo, one Smt.Yashasri Varal, who was appointed as a S.G.T. in Hindi medit.m was promoted as School Assistant(English) in Hindi mediurn school vide proceedings dated 02.03.2006. Thereafter, basing on her request, she was transferred frorn Hindi medium school to Telugu Mediurn School.

¶35

Further, petitioner also submitted a representation to the respondent authorities to consider his claim for transfer to Telugu Medium School frorn Hindi Mediurn School. When the respondents failed to consider the

¶36

'":ja

¶37

¶38

claim of the petitioner, the petitioner approached the A.P.A.T. Tribunal ald filed O.A.No. 1978 of 2Ol5 wherein, the A.P.A.T. while adrnitting the O.A. on 3O.04.2O 15 granted interirn direction, directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for transfer to Telugu Medium School as School ,\ssistant (Bio-Science) from Hindi Medium School in the ensuing tran sfer counselling.

¶39

Learned counsei ior ti:e petitioner further contended that respoililent: llo.3, rvithou t properly considering the clairn of the petitioner and without assigning any valid reasorl rejected the claim vide the impugned proceedings dated O8.06.2015. He further contended that the respondents extended the vr:ry same beneht in favour of the sirnilarly situated t:mployee namely Smt.Yashasri Varal, pursuant to thr: orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.66 12 of 2O08, dated 28.O3.2OOa. Hence, the irnpugned order passed by respondent No.3 is liable to be set aside as the sa-me is in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of lr,dia.

¶40

¶41

¶42

Per contra, learned Assistant^{Government Pleader} for Services-I submits that^{respondentNo.3after} considering the representation^{subrnitted bythe} petitioner pursuant to the orders^{passed by the A.P.A.T.} dated 30.O4.2O15 in^{O.A.No.1978 of 2015 rightlypassed} the impugned order dated^{O8.06.2015 by givingproper} reasons and wherein^{specificallyit was stated that there} is no provision to transfer/^{convert ttre teachersfrorn} one category to another^{category and one rnediumto} another medium as^per the^{rules. As such, there is no} illegality or irregularity in the^{irnpugned rejectionorder} passed by respondent No.3.

¶43

Having considered the^{rival submissionsrnade by} the respective^{parties andperusedthematerial} available on record, it is^{not indispute that,the} petitioner was appointed as^{Secondar5r Grade Teacherin} Hindi Medium^{School inDSC 2OOO and subsequently} he was transferred^{to the post of School Assistant(Bio-} Science) in^{Hindi Medium School. Thepetitioner}

¶44

¶45

submitted a represerrtation to responclent No.3 on 22.04.2013 and 08.09.2014 respectively requesting to consider his claim for transfer to Telugu Mediurn School from Hindi Medium School as School Assistant (BioScience) in the said representation, the petitioner specifically stated that the respondent-authorit-ies have considered the claim of the similarly situated r:mployee namely Smt. Yashasri Varal pursuant to the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.6612 of 2O()8 dated 28.O3.2O1a and also through Memo No.2654/ser-llI/2006, dated 22.O8.20O6 issued by the Government ol Andhra Pradesh Education(SE-SER-II) Deparl.m:nt.

¶46

It is very much relevant to mention that respondent No.3 rejected the representation of the petitioner and passed the impugned order, stal.ing that there is no provision to transfer/ convert the leachers from one category to another category arrd one medium to another rnedium as per rules everl without rnentioning the relevant rules. In the counter affidavit also the respondents have not stated the relevant rules,

I I

prohibiting the conversion of one category to another category and from one mediurn to another medium, especially the petitioner made specific averment that respondents have considered the clairn of the similarly situated ernployee, namely, Smt. Yashasri Varala and as amounts to clear discrimination,

¶51

Taking into consideration of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents are directed to consider the claim of the petitioner for trarrsfer frorn Hindi Medium School to Telugu Medium School as School Assistant (Bio-Science) uninfluenced by the impugned rejection order dated 08.06.2015 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law by giving opportunity to the petitioner within a period of Six (06) weeks frorn the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶52

Accordingly, the writ petition (TR) is disposed of. No costs.

'r3&:'f

. | '1:.'

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

¶57

closed.

¶58

SDi.T. TITTUMALA^DEVI ASSISTAN REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// L--iI),,.-,,.-

¶59

L--iI),,.-,,.-

¶60

SECI]ON OFFICER

¶61

To, 1. The Director of School^{Education,Telangana State, Saifabad, llyderabad} 500004 2. The Districl Educational^{Officer, Adilabad, Achlabad Dlstrict 504001} One CC to Sri S Surender^{Reddy Advocate} {OPUCI 4. iwo CCs to GP For Services,^{Hi-gh Courtfor the State of Telanrlana} tourl 5. Two CD Copies MBC

-r,^BS fr-

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1410912023

r1 t''
l,'
, t) s
qs .1, il
.L<br>!^)
t.D
i l-t ,. ,-1i ' ,

¶66

ORDER

¶67

WP(TR).No.457' 1 of 2017

¶68

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶69

WITHOUT COSTS

¶70

Vi"o
+o"

Kema Venkateshwar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kema Venkateshwar 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

Nelluri Nageswara Rao Vs The State of Telangana

R. Sarala Vs The Telangana State Road Transport Corporation

T.Rajender Rao, Vs The State of Telangana, rep. by its Secretary

Sk. Yakub Jani Vs The District Educational Officer

A Shankar Vs Sri Raji Reddy

Khaja Moinuddin Vs The Govt. of Telangana