Disposed

M.A. Saleem v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Mar 2024WP/6495/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Writ Petitioner challenged the non-appointment as Junior Panchayath Secretary despite securing 11th rank. The Court disposed of the petition without examining merits, directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation and requiring the respondents to decide within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to submit fresh representation; respondents directed to consider it and pass orders within six weeks.

M.A. Saleem Vs The State of Telangana — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁰¹ ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 6495 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

M.A. Saleem, S/o. tr/.A. Nayeem, aged about 46^years, Occ.^Outsourclng Panchayath Secretary, R/o. H.No.2-96, Near Weekly^{Market, Village and} ltlandal Sirpur (T), K.B. Asifabad District.

¶9

...PETIT|ONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, represenled by its Principal Secretary,^Panchayath Raj Deparlment, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Secretariat,^Hyderabad.

¶12

The Commissioner, Panchayath Raj Department, Urdu Hall^Lane. Himayathnagar, Hyderabad.

¶13

The District Collector,^(Panchayath Wing) and Chairman^{PanchayathRaj} Department, Komuram Bheem Asifabad District at Asifabad-

¶14

The Additional Collector, Local Bodies, Komuram Bheem^{Asifabad District at} Asifabad.

¶15

5 The District Panchayath Officer, Komuram Bheem Asifabad^{District at} Asifabad.

¶16

The Divisional Panchayath Officer, Kaghaznagar Division at^Kagaznagar.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of^{lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the^{High Courtmay be} pleased to pass an order or direction one in the nature of the writ or mandamus or any other appropriate writ or d irection^holding that^{the actionof the Respondents} in not considering the representation dated O5-O2-2O24 filed by^{the Petitioner and} not appointing the Petitioner as Junior Panchayath Secretary^{by filling up the} vacancies under BC-E Category in the recruitment notification^{No.2560/CPRand} RElBZl20lT dated 31-08-20'18 is illegal, arbitrary,^{malicious,motivated, against} the principles of natural^justice and^{fair play, besides discriminationand violative} of Articles 14, 19,21 of the Constitution^{of lndia and may be pleasedto direct the} Respondents to appoint the Petitioner as Junior^{Panchayath Secretaryin} Komurambheenr Asifabad District, by filling up the^{vacanciesunderBC-E}

¶19

Category as per the recruitment notification No.2560/CPR & RE/82l2017 dated 31-08-2018 and as per the merit list.

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶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 Respondents to appoint the Petitioner as Junior panchayath Secretary in Komurambheem Asifabad District, by filling up the vacancies under BC-E category as per the recruitment notification No.2560/cpR and RE/B2l2oi7 dated 31-08-2018 and as per the merit list during the pendency of the above writ petition.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MD AJMAL AHMED Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA^KARTHIK

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.6495 OF 2024

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶28

India, is hled seeking the following relief:

¶29

u...to pass an ordcr or direction one in the nature of the writ or mandamus or any other appropriate^writ or direction^{holdingthatthe} action of the Respondents in not considering the representation^dated O5-O2 2024 nled by the Petitioner and not appointing^{the Petitioneras} Junior Panchayath Secretary by litting uP the^{vacanciesunderBC-E} Category in the recruitment notification No.2560/CPR^&RElB2l20lT dated 3 I 08-20 18 is illegal, arbitrary,^{malicious, motivatedagainst the} principles of natural^justice and fair ptay, besides discrimination and violativc of Articles 11, 19. 2l oi the Constitution of lndia and^{may be} pleased to dircct thc llcspondcnts to appoint the Petitioner^{as Junior} Panchayath Secrctarl' in Komurambhcem Asifabad^{District, by fillingup} the vacancies under BC ti Category as^per the^{recruitmentnotification} No.256OlCPR &" RE/82l2Ol7 dated 3l-08-2018 and as^{per the merit list} and to pass..."

¶30

Heard Sri Md. Ajmal Ahmed, learned counsel^{apPearing for} the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for^Services, appearing for respondent Nos.l to 6. With their^{consent, the writ} petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage.

¶31

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits thatⁱⁿ response to Notification No.256OlCPR&'RElB2l2Ol7^dated 31.08.2018, issued by respondent No.1, ca-Iling for applications^to the post of Junior Panchayat Secretaries, the^{petitionerhas} submitted his application, participated in the selection^process arrd secured 1lth rank in the merit list by scoring 67.75^marks

¶32

¶33

PK,] wp_6495_2024

¶34

However, he could not secure the employment. Learned counsel further submits that Mr. Javed parvaiz Khan and Mr. Imran Khan stood at Serial Nos.S and 1 0, respectively, in the merit tist, but after verification, their serections had been canceled and they were terminated from service. Thereafter, since two vacancies arose and the petitioner is ranked at Serial No. 1 1, he made a representation to respondent No.4 on 05.02.2024 seeking to appoint him as Junior panchayat Secretary. Hou,ever, the said representation is stilr pending before respo.dent No.4. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the respondents, and prays this Court to direct the respondents to considcr the same and pass appropriate orders.

¶35

Learned Government pleader for Services fairly submits the respondents will consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶36

Having regard to the rival submissions made by the respective parties, without going into merits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the respondents within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt ol a copy of this order. On receipt

¶37

¶38

PK,J wp_6495_2024

¶39

of such representation from the petitioner, the respondents are

¶40

directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, within a period of six (O6) weeks thereof and communicate a copy thereof to the petitioner.

¶41

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed. No costs.

¶42

SD/. A. PRATHIMA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTI N OFFICER

1 The Principal Secretary, Panchayath Raj Department, Dr. B.R. Ambdkar Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana.

¶47

2 The Commissioner, Panchayath Raj Department, Urdu Hall Lane, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad. The District Collector, (Panchayath Wing) and Chairman Panchayath Raj Department, Komuram Bheem Asifabad District at Asifabad.

¶48

4 The Additional Collector, Local Bodies, Komuram Bheem Asif4bad District at Asifabad.

¶49

5 The District Panchayath Officer, Konruram Bheem Asifabad District at Asifabad.

¶50

6 The Divisional Panchayath Officer, Kaghaznagar Division at Kagaznagar.

¶51

7 One CC to SRI tvlD AJMAL AHIUED, Advocate [OPUCI 8 Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶52

I Two CD Copies

PSK. KKS

HIGH COURT

DATED:1 810312024

ORDER

WP.No.6495 of 2024

.,':::'rltI(
'o.v
.t
J '$ o ilnr 2r1q
* "t'.i- -'.y'
| , ,..'.

¶59

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS.

¶60

@c"1:tt' Gov^%.'

M.A. Saleem v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.A. Saleem 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kanumetta Ramana Murty Vs State of Telangana

Boddupally Pochaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Mohd Jilani Vs State of Telangana

P.V. Shalini Vs The State of Telangana

Madasu Anusha Vs The State of Telangana

S.P.Satish Kumar, Vs The State of Telangana