Disposed

Ramavath Santosh v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC19 Mar 2024WP/6669/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the provisional selection notification for Trained Graduate Teachers-English posts was disposed after the Recruitment Board stated the petitioner was qualified and fell within the zone of consideration. The Court directed release of his provisional selection along with other candidates' selections.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.2 (TREIRB) to release the provisional selection of the petitioner along with selections of other candidates; no costs.

Ramavath Santosh Vs The State of Telangana — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[3301 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 6669 OF 2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

Ramavath Santosh, S/o. Ramavath Ravojee, aged about 26 years, Occ: Studen UU nem ployed, R/o 1 5-284, Tirumala Nagar, Road No.1 2, Almasguda. Hyderabad.

¶10

...PET|T|ONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, Deparlment of Social Welfare and Tribal Welfare, Secretariat Buildlngs, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Telangana Residential Educational lnstitutions Recruitment Board (TREIRB), DSS Bhavan, Masab Tank, Hyderabad- 500028 Rep. by its Chairman.

¶14

The Executive Officer (Convenor), The Telangana Residentiat Educationat lnstitutions Recruitment Board (TREI-RB), DSS Bhavan, Masab Tank, Hyderabad- 500028

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Courl may be pleased to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly in the .nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring Notification of provisionally Selected candidates for the post of Trained Graduate Teachers-English, issued by the Respondents 2 and 3 on 0210312024 wrthout considering the candidature of the Petitioner and withour following the transparent procedure in selection of the candidates as arbitrary, illegal and vrolatrve of the Articles 14. 15. 16 and 21 ot the Constitutron of tndia, by consequently directing the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 to appoint the Petitioner for the post of Trained Graduate Teachers-English.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶18

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 Notificatron of provisionally selected candidates for the post of

¶19

Trained GradLrate Teachers-E nglish, issued by the Respondents 2 and 3 on O2lO3l2O24 and all its further proceedings including the selection.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI B.RAJESHWAR REDDY counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR SERVICES ll Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.2 & 3: SRI NAYAKAWADI RAMESH, SC FOR TRElRB

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

,"/ ,

\ \

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.6669 OF 2024

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

This Writ Pctition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶29

India, is filcd secking the following relief:

¶30

".. . to rssue a Writ order or direction more particularly in the nature oI Writ of Mandamus declaring Notification of provisionally selected candidates for the post of Trained Graduate TeachersEnglish, issued b] the Respondents 2 & 3 on 02.03.2024 without considering thc candidature of the Petitioner and without following the transparent procedure in selection of the candidates as arbitrary illegal and violative o[ the Articles 14, 15, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India, by conscquently dirccting the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to appoint the Petitioner for the post of Trained Graduate Tcachcrs llnglish and pass..."

¶31

When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri Nayakau,adi Ramcsh, learncd Standing for respondent Nos.2 and I)-Telangana Resiclenrial [iducarional Institutions Recruitment Board, on u,ritten instructions, submits that the petitioner herein is fully qualilied ars pcr the Notification and he falls within the zone ol consideration for selection to the post of Trained Graduate Teacher- English, in the ratio of 1:I. However, the Provisional Selection ol the petitioner will be released in due course of time.

¶32

Sri t3. Rajeshsar Reddy, learned counsel for the pctitioner, lairlv acccdcs to thc aforesaid submission and prays this Court to dircct thc respondents to appoint. the petitioner as Trained Graduatc Te acher- English, r.vithin a reasonable period ol time.

PK,J wp 6669 2024

Recording the submissions of leaned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3, the Writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to release the provision selection of the petitioner, along with the selections of other candidates.

¶37

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

¶38

SD/.V.KAVITHA ASSTSTANT RSctsTRAR //TRUE COpy// ,tV

¶39

¶40

sEcTtoN oFFtcER

¶41

The Srate of reranoan3. Deparlment o[ Socrar werfare and rribar werfare, Secretariat Buitdin{s Hyder'abaO

¶42

^ z. r ne _narrman, Ietanoana Residentral Educatlonal lnstitutions Recruitment ^^{9gu'9 (rREr-RB), DSS Bhavan-r\dr;;i;;i,;i;;eiabad_} 500028. 3. The Executive Offjcer rConvenor), t ne f elanga;a- Hesldential Educational tnstiturions Recruirmcnr eo,d irhEi'RB; Ebr6'dnl'r"" Masab Tank, Hyderabad- 500028

¶43

One CC to SRt B RA.,FSHWAR_REDDY, Advocate tOpUCl . Iy;""";;" ?S.fr? senvrces iL uigii c;;ir:;i." Siaii: or rerangana, at

¶44

1. Two CD CopiesOne cc to sRt NAYAKAWADT RA|,4ESH, SC FOR TRETRB [Opuc] PSK. KKS

¶45

¶46

HIGH COURT

¶47

DATED:1 9103t2024
<br>!. !<br>I i i, ,i )n,11
,i
/:,
ORDER

¶48

WP.No.6G69 of 2024

¶49

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETTTION WITHOUT COSTS.

Ramavath Santosh v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramavath Santosh 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

M.A. Saleem Vs The State of Telangana

P.V. Shalini Vs The State of Telangana

Madasu Anusha Vs The State of Telangana

Chanda Annapurna Vs The State of Telangana

M.Parameshwari Vs State of Telangana

G. Madhuri Vs The State of Telangana