Dismissed¶51

Md. Amjad Ali v. The Union of India

Telangana HC7 Apr 2026WP/8322/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court; Justice K. Sarath; W.P. No. 8322 of 2025; decided 07.04.2026; Md. Amjad Ali v. Union of India, BSNL and others; writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; liberty to approach Central Administrative Tribunal; no order as to costs; BSNL regularization/absorption of casual labourer/mazdoor; Telecom District Karimnagar; impugned rejection letter dated 01.03.2023; Article 226 mandamus; Articles 14, 16 and 21; Section 151 CPC; State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi referred; withdrawal letter dated 01.04.2026; miscellaneous petitions closed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal; pending miscellaneous petitions closed; no order as to costs. ¶51

Md. Amjad Ali Vs The Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal; pending miscellaneous petitions closed; no order as to costs.

¶51

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents' action in not considering the petitioner's claim for regularization/absorption into service and rejecting that claim (impugned letter dated 01.03.2023) is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution (issue as pleaded; not adjudicated, as the petition was withdrawn).

¶16

Ratio / Principle

Permission sought by the petitioner's counsel to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal was granted, and the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn with such liberty.

¶37

Key takeaways

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed, and there shall be no order as to costs.ratio¶38

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (K. Sarath, J.) — W.P. No. 8322 of 2025, decided 07.04.2026: Md. Amjad Ali, a casual labourer/mazdoor of the Telecom District, Karimnagar, had sought a writ of mandamus declaring illegal and arbitrary the respondents' (Union of India/BSNL) rejection, vide letter dated 01.03.2023, of his claim for regularization/absorption into service, pleading violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 and relying on judgments in W.P. No. 8495 of 2004, Writ Appeal No. 2560 of 2005 and State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi. Before adjudication on merits, counsel for the petitioner filed a letter dated 01.04.2026 in the Registry seeking leave to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Court granted permission, dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn with such liberty, closed all pending miscellaneous applications, and made no order as to costs. No issue on the regularization claim was adjudicated; the order carries no merits ruling.

¶1

[³³⁰² ]

¶2

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

¶3

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:8322 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Causal lMd. Amjad Ali, S/o Nabi Saheb, Aged about 58yrs, Occ: Labour/Mazdoor, O/o The Principal General Manager, Telecom District, Karimnagar, Karimangar District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

ANO

¶11

The Union of lndia, Rep.by its Secretary, Department of Communications, New Delhi.

¶12

The Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd, Rep.by its Director General, New Delhi

¶13

The Chief General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Hyderabad. 500001.

¶14

The General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Karimnagar, Karimnagar District

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be^pleased to issue a Writ or Order or Direction more particular one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS, by declaring the action of the Respondents in not considering the claim of the petitioner for reg ula rization/absorption into service and rejecting the claim of the petitioner vide lmpugned Lr.No. PGMTD-WGL/Legalcorr/Md.Amhed Alil2o22-23143, dl. 01 .03.2023 is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional and violative of Article^'14, 1 6 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia, contrary to the Judgment passed in W.P.No. 849512004, dt. 25.8.2OO4 and also in Writ Appeal No. 2560 of 2005, dt. 9.10.20'14 and also contrary to the Judgment of Apex Court in case of State of Karnataka and others Vs. Uma Devi and set aside the impugned rejection dl. 01 .3.2023 and consequently direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization/absorption of their services forthwith with all consequential benefi ts.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the c rcumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court^{rr ay be pleased} to direct the respondents to consider the case of he^{petitionersfor} reguta rization/abso rption into service, by suspending the^ir 'pugned orders^issued vide Lr. No. PG MTD-WG L/Legalcorr/Md.A mhed Alil 2022-2?' 43, dt: 01 .03.2023.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mrs. G. UMA RANI

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 SRI M. VIJAY KUMAR, Sr SC FOR CENTRAL⁽ iOVT)

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent No.2 to 4: M/s. P. SARAOHA,^{iC FOR BSNL}

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

¶24

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶25

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

¶26

WRIT PETITIoN No.E322 of 2025

¶27

THE OTTH DAY OF APRIL 2026

Between:

Md.Amjad Ali

.,.Petitioner

AND

The Union of India, Rep. b1 irs Secreraiy,

¶33

Department of Communications and others

¶34

.,.Respondents

¶35

ORDER:

¶36

Mrs.^(i.Uma Rani, lcarned Counsel lor the petitioner on record, filcd a letter dated Ol.O4 2026 in the Registry seeking permissiorr ol this Courrt ro r.r ithdrzru, thc present Writ Petition with a Iibcrlv to the petitioncr to approach the Central Administratir,e Tribunal.

¶37

Accordingly, permissi,on is granted as sought for. This Writ Petition is dismisscd as u irhdrar.r n b-y granLing liberty to [hc petitioner to approach the Central Adrninistrative Tribunal. 3. Miscctlancous pctitions, if an.1 , pcnding in this Writ perition

¶38

shall stancl closcd. Therc shall bc no ordcr- as to costs.

¶39

//TRUE COPY//

¶40

SD/. A. JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6

¶41

SECTION OFFICER

¶42

To,

¶43

9n"^{CCto Mrs. c. UMA RANI,} Advocate IOPUCI 2. one cc to M/s. p sARAD.HA: s_C rpe*!b"r.rr_"f6hucl I ?,13 33 8i[i' vrJAY KUMAd (s;diEiihEirvrnnr cowl ropucr BN SE

CC TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED:0710412026

ORDER

-r -i :i I4
.:
oO
q, O T APfl 2tf2[ J:\c'_ ij
r. -,
..,..- :r,

¶50