Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J
Petitioner – Appellant
Versus
Respondents – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's request for promotion based on caste certification. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. court highlights the importance of timely verification for administrative actions. (Para 4 , 9) |
| 3. court mandates expedited decision-making by respondents. (Para 5 , 10) |
| 4. verification reports pending; necessary for promotion decision. (Para 7 , 8) |
ORDER:
Heard Sri Ramesh Chilla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I appearing on behalf of the respondents.
2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:
“…to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly on in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the 2nd Respondent in considering the genuine caste certificate of the petitioner even after inquiry reports submitted by 6th Respondent - RDO and 7th Respondents - Tahsidar and as a result continuing in Assistant Beat Officer by denying her Promotion as Forest Beat Officer since 2012 is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, unfair, unreasonable, unjust, unconstitutional, unlawful, inequity and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and in violation of Articles 14, 16,
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
