Disposed

B. Veeranna v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC9 Jan 2025WP/1040/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Teachers appointed in DSC-2008 sought notional seniority and monetary benefits in the School Assistant cadre from initial appointment. The Court disposed of the writ petition at admission, directing respondents to consider representations in light of earlier orders in related matters within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to consider petitioners' representations for seniority on par with DSC-2008 appointees, per prior orders, within six weeks and communicate decision.

B. Veeranna Vs The State of Telangana — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³³⁰¹ I

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 1040 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

B. VEERANNA, S/o. Bichya, Age- 40^{years, Occ- SA(ErglishTeacter),} Address- ZPHS, Allapally^(V) and^(M), Bhadradri^{Kothagudem District. (T.S.)} Employee lD - 1641404.

¶9

A. VEERANNA, S/o. Ramjee,^{Age- 49 years, Occ- SA(English Teacher),} Address- MPUPS, MANIKYARAM(V),^{Yellandu(M), Bhadradri Kothagudem} District. (T.S.) Employee lD^- 1641257.

¶10

M. RAJU, S/o. Bheemudu, Age- 39^{years,Occ- Te?cher,SA(E19lls.h),} Address- ZPHS, Komararam, Yellandu(M),^{Bhadradri Kothagudem District'} (T.S.) Employee lD - 1641255.

¶11

P. PAPARAO, S/o.Pothaiah,^Age- 39^{years,Occ- Teacher,SA(,taths),} Address- ZPHS, muthyalapadu, tekupalli^{(M), Bhadradri Kothagudem District.} (T.S.) Employee lD -^'1640783.

¶12

P. TRIVENI, D/o. JOGAIAH,^{Age- 38 years,Occ-Teacher,SA(M THS),}

¶13

' Address- ZPHS, Komararam,^{Yellandu(M),Bhadradri Kothagudem District.} (T.S.) Employee lD - 1641623.

¶14

CH. VENKATESHWARLU, S/o. MI)(AMAIAH,^Age-39 years, OccTeacher, SA(PED), Address- ZPHS, Thimmapeta,^Mangapeta (M),^{MuluguDistrict.} (T.S.) Employee lD.- 1641601.

¶15

B. LAXMAN, S/o. Bitchu, Age-^{42 years, Occ- Teacher, SA(English)' A{{re9s-} MPUPS, Gtittagudem^{(V), -Mulkalbpally(M),Bhadradri KothagudemDistrict.} (T.S.) Employee lD - 1641248.

¶16

...PETITIONERS

¶17

AND

¶18

The State of Telangana, rep.^{By its Principal Secretary, School Education} Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶19

The Director of School Education,^{TelanganaState Hyderabad}

¶20

The District Educational Officer,^{Khammam, Khammam District.}

¶21

The District Educational Officer,^{Mulugu, Mulugu District.}

¶22

The District Educational Officer,^{Bhadradri Kothagudem, Bhadradri} Kothagudem Dist.

¶23

,..RESPONDENTS

¶24

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Merndamus, to declare the inaction of the respondents in fixing the seniority of the petitioners notionally cum monitory benefits in the cadre of the SCHOOL ASSISTANT (SA) i.e. School Assistant in English, Maths and PED from the date of appointments as Teachers in DSC-2008, inspite of the written representation dates Ctgl12l2024 as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional declare that the petitioners are entitled to be treated on par with the candidates who were selected and appointed in pursuance of DSC-2008 with all .consequential benefit:s, and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶25

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶26

Petition under Secl:ion 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 herein to forthwith consider the case of the petitioner for fixing the seniority of the petitioners notionally with monitory benefits in the cadre of the SCHOOL ASSISTANT (SA) i.e. School Assistant in English, Maths and PED from the date of 1st Appointment 0411112010 as Teachers in DSC-2008, as per the terms of reported^judgmernt of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 1998 (5) SCC 246 and 2008 (7) SCC 728, similar order passed by THE Hon'ble High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad in WP No. 18479 of 2024, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition

¶27

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. Y SURESH KUMAR

¶28

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES I

¶29

The Court made the following: ORDER

l I i

I I i I

I I

THE HON'BLE^{SRI JUSTICEPULLAKARTHIK}

¶34

WRIT^{PETITION No.1o40 0F 2025}

¶35

ORDER:

¶36

With the^{consent of both the parties' the Writ Petition} is disposed^{of at the stage of admissionitself'}

¶37

This^{Writ Petition' under Article226 of the}

¶38

Constitutionoflndia,isfiledseekingthefollowingreliet

¶39

"...to issue^{an appropriateWrit'Order or Direction' more} clf Writ^{of Mandamus'to declare} oarticularly^{one in the} "l't"tt ffi'r#"rJ"-.r^{tnt tt"frnJtntsin fixing the senioritvof the} benelits^{in the. cadre of the} oetitioners notionally "tltt"'t"itr fiilIJi o"ilt";i;aiⁱ '^{,'i't'"r''""i"tuntin English' Maths and} PED from^{the date of tppoitttrn""t"as Teachers-inDSC-2O08'in} ;a.;r*:*,,1r.:T'ii:*J:?iii:1,.':;i'J3.','"1;fi "i'll: illegal, arbitrarY,^unlus rre-titioners are^{entitled io Lt tt"ttta on par withthe candidates} f#;;;;td ""a 'Jptiti"J^{in pursuanceot DSC-2o08with} all consequential^{benefrts '"}

¶40

When the^{matter is taken up for hearing'}

¶41

learned^{counselfor the petitionerssubmitted that the} issue involved^{in this Writ Petition is squarelycovered} by the order^{passedby this Court in W'P'No'18479 of} 2024,^{dated 15.07} '2024'

¶42

The^{sarne isnot disputed by learned} Government^{Pleader for Services-t' appearing for the} respondents.

¶43

¶44

Fo[lowing the said order and for the reasons statr:d therein, this Writ Petition is also disposed of rlirecting the respondent authorities to consider repre,sentations, dated 09. 72.2024, submitted by the petitioners for conferment of seniority of the petitioners on par with the candidates, who have been selected ancl appointed pursuant to DSC-2O08, in the light of the orders of this Court in W.P.No.21193 of 2017, dated tZ9.O6.2Ol7 and W.P.No.t494L of 2014, tn dated l3.O7.i'.O22 and pass appropriate orders, accordance with law, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decision taken thereon to the petitioners.

¶45

Miscellaleous petitions if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall s;tand closed.

¶46

^ Sril-s.tvrlr-r-TKARJUNA RAo SI TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

¶47

To,

¶48

The Principal Secr,=tary, School Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶49

The Director of School Education, Telangana State Hyderabad

¶50

The District Educalional Officer, Khammam, Khammam District.

¶51

The District Educalional Officer, Mulugu, Mulugu District.

¶52

The District Educalional Officer, Bhadradri Kothagudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem Dist.

¶53

One CC to SRl. Y SURESH KUMAR Advocate tOpUCl

¶54

Gr@'

¶55

i 1 I , I I I

¶56

' 8r"r"".^{to GP FOR SERV|CES t, High Court for} the State of Tetangana.

¶57

,*o CD Copies

BSK^*3.

LHV

HIGH COURT

DATED:0910112025

ORDER

WP.No.1040 of 2025

/ra=
-ifl€ s14 15
K
l,
2 6 r{il 2025 t
t
5lr:1':l'.t
-i, ":)

¶65

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶66

.\k JV<br>O'tV

B. Veeranna v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B. Veeranna 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

K. Jagannadham Vs The State of Telangana

B. Venkatesham Vs The State of Telangana

M.Srinivas Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Shaik Kareem Vs Union of India

P. Gangaiah Vs The State of Telangana

M.A. Basith Vs The State of Telangana