Dismissed¶39

Bathula Ravichitra v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC28 Jan 2025WA/110/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Bathula Ravichitra; withdrawal of writ appeal; Telangana State Public Service Commission (TGPSC); Gurukul Principal recruitment; Notification No. 29/2017 dated 02.06.2017; 93 posts; W.P. No. 16835 of 2023; W.A. Nos. 965 of 2024 and batch; common judgment dated 07.11.2024; Section 151 CPC suspension petition; clause 15 of the Letters Patent; WA No. 110 of 2025; Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul; Smt Justice Renuka Yara; dismissal as withdrawn without costs; liberty to file representation before State Government.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed as withdrawn in terms of the common judgment dated 07.11.2024 in W.A.Nos.965 of 2024 and batch, with liberty to the appellant to file a representation before the State Government (as sought at para 33); no costs imposed; pending interlocutory applications stood closed. ¶39

Bathula Ravichitra Vs The State of Telangana — Telangana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶39

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ appeal could be permitted to be withdrawn, with liberty to the appellant to file a representation before the State Government, notwithstanding the vehement objection raised by respondent No.1.

¶34

Court's answer

The Court considered respondent No.1's vehement objection to the withdrawal unwarranted, since no such objection had been raised before the Coordinate Bench in W.A.Nos.965 of 2024 and batch, and the appellant was only seeking withdrawal of the appeal.

¶37

Ratio / Principle

The writ appeal was dismissed as withdrawn in terms of the common judgment dated 07.11.2024 passed in W.A.Nos.965 of 2024 and batch, with no costs.

¶39

Key takeaways

Pending interlocutory applications, if any, were directed to stand closed.ratio¶40-41

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Appeal (High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad) under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the learned Single Judge's common order dated 16.07.2024 in W.P. No. 16835 of 2023. The appellant sought to withdraw the appeal relying on the common judgment dated 07.11.2024 in W.A.Nos.965 of 2024 and batch (where the same single-judge order had been challenged), with liberty to file a representation before the State Government. Although the Government Pleader for Services-I (respondent No.1) vehemently objected, the Court deemed such objection unwarranted as no such objection had been raised before the Coordinate Bench. The writ appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn in terms of that common judgment, with no costs, and pending interlocutory applications were closed. Coram: Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul (author) and Smt Justice Renuka Yara. Related matters: IA Nos. 3 and 4 of 2025 under Section 151 CPC concerning suspension of the impugned orders and non-filling of 93 Gurukul Principal posts under Notification No. 29/2017 dated 02.06.2017.

¶1

[³⁴⁴⁶ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FORTHE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY, THE^{TWENWEIGHTHDAYOF JANUARY} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY FIVE}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL} AND THE HONOURABLE^{SMT JUSTICE RENUKAYARA}

¶6

WRIT APPEAL^N O:1^{10 0F 2025}

¶7

Writ Appeal under^{clause 15 of the Letters Patent prefened} the Order oateo^{,tarctio24in w.p No. 16835of 2023 on the file of the High court.} -against

¶8

Between:

¶9

Bathula Ravichitra,^{D/ o. Somaiah,Aged} .about^{42 years, occ. Private} i;;;i;;,,'ivd.^{tl.r'io.ilo]rqliijlsizbt,'ekshavasriHeisnts,sriramNasar} ColonY, SuryaPet-50821^3'

¶10

...APPELLANT/WRIT^PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State^{of Telangana,Rep by its Principal Secretary'.SchoolEducation} ' D;r"rffi;i, b;.8.R.em'bedkar Secretariai, saidabad' Hvderabad'

¶13

Telangana^{State Public Service Commission, Repby its Secretary' Prathibha} - ehJvat M.J. Coad, Nampally, Hyderabad - 500001 '

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

IA NO: 3 OF 2025

¶16

Petition under^{Section151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition,the Highcourt may be pleasedto} suspend the^{impugned commonorders of the Learned Single Judge dated'} 16.07.2024 in^{W.P.No.16835of 2023, pending disposalof the aboveWrit} petition.

¶17

IANO :4OF²⁰²⁵

¶18

PetitionunderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatinthecircumstancesstated intheaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighcourtmaybepleasedto direct the 2nd^{Respondeni not,to fill up the left over vacanciesof the Notification} No.29t2017,^{dated. 02.06.2017 i'e', 93 posts of Gurukul Principalpending} disposal of the^{aboveWrit APPeal.}

I I i

I I i

Counsel for the Appeilant: SRt pRABHAKAR CHIKKUDU Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: Gp FOR SERVICES I

¶23

Gounsel for the Respondent No,2: sRr p.s. RAJASEKHAR, sc FoR Tcpsc The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶24

¶25

ltt,,

¶26

THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAI'L

¶27

AND

¶28

THE HON'BLE SMT. WSTICE RENI'KA YARA

¶29

WRIT APPEAL No.IlO of2025

¶30

JUDGMENT (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujog Paul)

¶31

¶32

Sri Prabhakar Chikkudu, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri S. Satyan arayarra, learned Government Pleader for Services-I, for respondent No.l and Sri P.S. Rajasekhar, learned Standing Counsel for Telangana State Public Service Commission (TGPSC), I for respondent No.2 t

¶33

2 Learned counsel for the appellant, by placing reliance on the common judgment dated 07.11.2O24 passed in W.A.Nos.965 of 2024 and batch in which same order of learned single bench was challenged, seeks to withdraw this appeal with the liberty to the appellant to file a representation before the State Government.

¶34

While learned Standing Counsel for TGPSC, for respondent No.2, has no objection, learned Government Pleader for Services-I, for respondent No. 1, vehemently opposed the withdrawal of tltis appeal.

¶35

We wonder how such a vehement objection can be raised when, before the Coordinate Bench in W.A.Nos.965 of 2024 ayrd

¶36

¶37

batch, no suclL^{objectionwas raised, and the appellant herein is} only seeking withdrawal^{of the appeal.}

¶38

)1 ':<br>

¶39

Accordingly, this Writ Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn in terms of similzu common^judgment dated O7.11.2O24^{passed in} W.A.Nos.965 of 2024 and batch. No costs.

¶40

Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand

¶41

closed.

¶42

SD/.K.SAILESHI DEPUTY REGIS

/ITRUE COPY//

\ \

SECTION OFFICER

To, 1. One cC to SRI PRABHAKAR CHIKKUDU, {oyo-cg!e^tQf!lc.l, i. o;; cc io^{sRl P.S.RAJASEKHAR!sq F-oRT-GP.-SClg?uc]-} , 5. i*; ccs^{to Gp FORSERVICES l, High court for the state of Telangana} tourl

¶47