Disposed

Bonagiri Srinivas, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC6 Feb 2026WP/33547/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Deputy Commissioner in Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation sought preparation of seniority in the cadre of Municipal Commissioner Grade-III based on APPSC recruitment merit, with consequential promotions including a review DPC. The court, without examining merits, directed respondent No.1 to consider his representation dated 07.10.2024 and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No.1 directed to consider representation dated 07.10.2024 and pass appropriate orders as per law within eight weeks.

Bonagiri Srinivas, Vs The State of Telangana — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

[³³⁰² ]

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 33547 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Bonagiri .Srinivas, S/o.Ganga Ram, aged about 50 years, working as Deputy Commissioner, Circle-S, Saioornagar, Greater Hydera5ad Municipal" Corporation, Hyderabad.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

'1 . The State of Telangana, Rep by its principal Secretary, I\Iunicipal Administration and Urban Development, Secretaiiat Burldings, Secretariat, Hyderabad -500022.

¶12

The Commissioner and the Director Municipal Administration, Telangana, 640, A.C.Guards, Hyderabad - 500038.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

Pejtition under Article 226 oI lhe Constitution of tndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, direction, or Order, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not preparing the seniority as per Rule 33 b of Telanagana State and Sub-Ordinate Service Rules in the cadre of Municipal commissioner Grade-lll as per the merit assigned by the then APPSC at the time of recruitment to the said post in the Multi Zone ll and effecting further promotions to the next higher cadres without regularizing service in the Lower Cadre and placing persons who got less marks than petitioner and placing over and above the petitioner and trying to promote

¶15

them to the next cadre without preparing the seniority tasing on the merit assigned by the then APPSC and in not conducting the revirr r Dpc from the post of Municipal commissioner Grade-lll to the post of Additic r al Director is highly illegal and unjustifir:d with a direction to the respondents tc rrepare seniority as per Rule 33 b of r:langana State and subordinate service lules basing on the merit assigned by the they APPSC in the cadre of Municipal r omrrissioner Grade lll and assign seniority to the petitioner with all consequent u benefits and effect promotions to the next higher cadres basing on the said senio ty.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶17

Petition under section i 5'l cpc praying that in the cirr :mstances stated rn the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court ma1 be pleased to direct the respondents to prepare seniority as per Rule 33 b of 1 :langana State and subordinate service Rules basing on the merit assigned by flr then Appsc in the cadre of Municipal lommissioner Grade lll and assign sen ( rrty to the petitioner with all consequential benefits and effect promotions to the next higher cadres basing on the said seniority.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M. V. S. SAI KUMAR Counsel forthe Respondents: AGp FOR SERVICES - l

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶21

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

W.P.No.33547 of 2025

Date:06.O2.2026

Between:

Bonagiri Srinivas.

.. Petitioner.

And

The State of Telangana and others

¶29

.Respondents

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

Heard learned Counsel for thc petitioner and learne d As sis tant G overrlrrr.-ent PIe ader^fo r^S ervice^{s - I}

¶32

2 Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that thc petitioner is questioning the action of the responder-rts in not preparing the seniority as per Rule 33(b) of Telanagana State and Sub-Ordinate Service Rules in the cadre o[ Municipal Commissioner Grade-III as per the merit assigned by the then APPSC at the time of recruitment to the said post in the Multi Zone ll and effecting further promotions to the next higher cadres without regularizing service in the Lower Cadre and placing the persons rvho got

¶33

¶34

SK. J v'^).No l]3547 of 2{125

¶35

Iess marks than petitioner and^{placing tt :m overand} above the pctrtioner and trying to^{promote tlL m to the next} cadre u.itho ut preparing the seniority^basin 1^{on the merit} assigned by the ther-r APPSC and not^{condu<:ing the rcvicrv} DPC from tl're post of Municipal Commissiorr^{:r Grade-lllto} the post of ,\dditional Director in spite^of the^{'epresentation} of petitione:' dated 07.IO.2024 as illegal ar-r-^arbitraryand requested 1o direct the respondent No.l 1r consider^the said repres<rntation of the petitioner.

¶36

3 Leanred Assistant Government Pleader^lor Services-l submits that the respondent : rthorities^u'il1 consider the representation of petitioncr dated 07. lO.2024 as per law in due courst: and^requested to pass app ropriate orders

¶37

4 In view of the aforesaid submissions without^going into the mt:rits of the matter, the Writ Petit on is disposed of by dirt:cting the respondent No.1 t,: consider the representar,ion of petitioner dated O7.LO.r)24 and pass appropriatr: orders as per 1aw within a per od of eighl (8)

¶38

¶39

¶40

SK, J W.l' No.33547 ol' 2025

¶41

<sup>reeks from the date of receipt^{of a copy of this order. No}

¶42

order as to costs.

¶43

5 Miscellaneous Petitions, if any^pending in^{this writ}

¶44

petition, shall stand closed

¶45

SD/- N. CHANDRA^SEKHARRAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

The Principal Secretary,^{Municipal Administration} a nd Urban Development, State of Telangana,^{Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Hyderabad-5OO022}

¶50

¶51

One CC to SRI V.V.^{S SAI KUMAR, Advocate} [OPUC]

¶52

Two CCs-tb GP for^{Services-l;High Court for the State of Telanganaat} Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶53

Two CD Copies

tMP

I
HIGH COURT

DATI iD:0610212026

ORDER

WP.No ,33547 of 2025
lHE S
(
()
)- 1 2 Fr\ 20'10
sr,,,j
vrS7,i
PATCT{

¶61

DISPOSING OF THE V! RIT PETITION WI'I II.IOUT COSTS rKi tz-[-l>-c

Bonagiri Srinivas, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bonagiri Srinivas, 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

Ch. Sudershan Vs The State of Telangana

Valuvalu srinivasulu Vs The State of Telangana

Amaravathi K, Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Akash Das Vs The Union of India

A.Peddanna Kumar Vs State of Telangana

Nalleboina Ramchander Rao Vs The State of Telangana