Disposed

Mohd Jilani v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC15 Mar 2024WP/7012/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A candidate alleged he was wrongly omitted from the selection list for Trained Graduate Teacher (Hindi) despite scoring more marks than a selected candidate. The court disposed of the writ petition without going into merits, directing TREI-RB to consider and dispose of his pending representation within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 05.03.2024 and pass orders in accordance with law within four weeks; miscellaneous petitions closed; no costs.

Mohd Jilani Vs State of Telangana — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

I33ol I

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 7012 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mohd Jilani, S/o. Mohd Mohamood, Aged about 33 years, Occ. Unempl oyee, R/O. H.NO. 2-42, Posl & Village. Ainapoor, Mandal, Doma, Vikrabad Dist, Telangana (Hall Ticket No. 23O2049605).

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Educatlonal Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶12

2 Telangana Residential Educational lnstitutions, Recruitment Board TREI-R8, Rep by its Chairman office Office at 4th floor, DSS bhavan Opp to Chacha Nehru Park, Masab Tank, Hyuderabad-S0o0O4

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition under Article 226 of the Constituiion of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in not considering petitioner claim for appointment to the^post of Post Trained Graduate Teacher, Hindi though I secured merit is illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional with a consequential direction to the respondents {o consider^petitioner claim for appointment to the^post of T.G.T Hindi as^per my merit and suitability^withall consequential benefits.

¶15

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶16

Peti{ion under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affklavit filed in support of the^peti{ion, the High Court may be^pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to consider^petitioner claim for selec{ion^and

¶17

appointment to the post of T.G.T Hindi by disposing of petitioner representation dated 05.03.2O24 in the interest of^justice.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S.SURENDER REDDY

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR SERVICES-I

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI NAYAKAWADI RAMESH, SC FOR TREIRB

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI WSTICEPULLAKARTHIK}

¶23

WRIT PETITI^{ONNo.7O12 OF 2024}

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This Writ Petition,^{under Article 226 of the Constitution of}

¶26

India, is {iled^{seekingthe followingrelief:}

¶27

"...to issue a^{writ,order or direction more particularly one in the} natureofwrltofMADAMUStodectaretheactionofthe2"drespondentin not considering^{petitionerclaimfor appointment to the post of Post} Trained Graduale^{Teacher,Hindi thoughI secured merit is illegal arbitrary} andunconstitutionalw.ithaconsequentialdirectiontotherespondentsto consider^{petitionerclaim for appointmentto the postof T G T Hindi as per} my merit and suitability^{with atl consequential benefitsand pass "}

¶28

Heard Sri S.^{Surender Reddy, learned counsel appearing for} the petitioner^{and Sri Nayakawadi Ramesh,learned Standing} counsel for^{respondentNo.2. With their consent, the writ petition} is taken up for^{disposalat the admissionstage'}

¶29

karned^{counsel appearingfor the petitionersubmits that} the petitioner is^{a Graduate in Master of Arts inHindi and} completed Hindi^{Vidwanfrom Hindi Prachar Sabha'While so,} respondent No.2^{issued Notification No.9 of 2023 calling for} applications for^{variousposts including Trained GraduateTeacher} (Hindi). Since the^{petitioner is fully qualified and eligiblefor the} said post, he applied^{for the same and appeared inthe} examination with Hall^{Ticket No.2302049605, wherein,he secured} 51.53 marks including^{the T.E.T. marks.The petitioner was also}

¶30

¶31

PK,J wp_7O12-2O24

¶32

called for certificate verilication on 28.02.2024. Accordingly, he appeared for the same and the authorities verified his certificates. However, the petitioner's name was not found in the selection list. On inquiry, the petitioner carne to know that a person who secured less marks than the petitioner i.e.,51 marks, got selected lor the post of T.G.T. Hindi. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation to respondent No.2 on 05.03.2024, seeking reverilication of the general merit list. However, the said representation is still pending before respondent No.2. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner prays this Court to direct respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated O5.O3.2O24 and pass appropriate orders.

¶33

lrarned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 fairly submits that respondent No.2 will consider the representation of the petitioner dated O5.O3.2O24, and pass appropriate orders thereon.

¶34

Having regard to the rival submissions made by the respective parties, without going into merits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 05.03.2024 and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, within a

Dt1 t

wp_7O12-2O24

:7'

period of four (04) weeks from^{the date of receiptof a copy of this}

¶41

order and communicate^{a copy thereof to the petitioner'}

¶42

Miscellaneous^{petitions, if any, pendingin this writ petition,}

¶43

shall stand closed.^{No costs.}

¶44

To,

¶45

SDIK. SREERAMA^MURTHY ASSISTAI.IT REGIgTRAR L'

¶46

//TRUE COPY//

¶47

SECTION bFFICER

¶48

The Principal^{Secretary, Educational Department' SecretariatBuildings'} Hyderabad,^{State of Telangana.}

¶49

The Chairman,^{Telangana Residential Educationallmtitutions' Recruitment} - adlro-i-C'Ei-Cii, om"dai?til'n6o,, oss bhavan, opp to chacha Nehru Park' Masab Tank,^{HYderabad-50o004}

¶50

One CC to^{SRI S.SURENDER REDDY, Advocate IOPUC]}

¶51

One CC^{to SRI NAYAKAWADI RAMESH, SC FOR TREIRB[OPUCI}

¶52

5.TwoCCstoGPFoRSERVlcES-l,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat Hyderabad [OUT]

¶53

Two CD^CoPies

BSR

CC TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1510312024

ORDER

1HE S la r€
(o
t
J
) 1 5 l,lAR 2024
)
*
.,):- -:., '. ,

¶62

WP.No.7012 ot 2024

¶63

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION,

¶64

WITHOUT COSTS

¶65

e-1
I

Mohd Jilani v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Jilani v. 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

A. Venkatesham Vs The State of Telangana and 2 Others

Banoth Balaji Vs The State of Telangana and 3 Others

P.V. Satyanarayana Vs The Singareni Collieries Company Limited

Kanumetta Ramana Murty Vs State of Telangana

Boddupally Pochaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Sayila Suresh Vs The Singareni Collieries Company Limited