Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
Surepalli Nanda
J.Somanna – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's eligibility and historical context for promotion. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. formal representations for creating promotion channels. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. legal precedents affirming promotion rights. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. court considers educational staff rights in promotion. (Para 14) |
| 5. court's directive for government action on promotions. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
ORDER :
Surepalli Nanda, J.
Heard Sri M.Srikanth, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing on behalf of the respondents.
2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:
“…….issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not providing for at least two promotional channels from the post of Physical Directors/Lecturers in Physical Education in Government Degree Colleges by making appropriate provision in the Telangana State Collegiate Education Service, issued vide G.O.Ms.No. 6, Higher Education Department, dt. 06/02/2023 as discriminatory, arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the judgments of the Honourable Supreme Court and further direct th
Promotion is a fundamental aspect of service that must be equitably provided to all eligible employees, adhering to constitutional mandates of fairness and equality.
Denial of promotion based on accepted qualifications is arbitrary and violates principles of natural justice.
The government has a duty to create promotional avenues in public service to avoid stagnation and discontentment among employees.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
