SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 69808

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH,THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.M. MOHIUDDIN
K. Satyanarayana – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WP 24457/2023



THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No.24457 of 2023

ORDER:

Learned counsel Sri J.Nagaraja Rao appears for the petitioners.

Sri A.Raghuram, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Andhra Pradesh, appears for respondents No.1, 2 and 5.

Sri S.Suman, learned Government Pleader for Services – III, appears for respondent No.4.

2. The writ petition is preferred for the following prayer:

“For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, the petitioners pray that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus:

a) to call for the records relating to Order No.(1)/ 2017 in F.No.A-11014/10/2014-AT (part-2), dated 04-10- 2017 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel and Training, New Delhi and its consequential Order issued in G.O.Ms.No.133, General Administration (SR-I) Department, dated 04-10-2017 issued by the 1st Respondent recommending the petitioners for allocation to the State of Andhra Pradesh without considering the options exercised by the petitioners even without notice or affording an opportunity of hearing which is required as the domicile has been modified and set aside the same in so far as the petitioners are concerned and consequently declare that the petitioners’ domicile is in the State of Telangana by virtue of their local status as per the provisions of the Presidential Order and further direct the Government of Telangana to initiate steps to bring back the petitioners to the State of Telangana and direct the Government of Andhra Pradesh to send the petitioners back to the State of Telangana without insisting for any hyper technicalities involved in the subject matter in the same capacity i.e. Record Assistants, which post they were holding in the erstwhile HOD of A.P. Administrative Tribunal.

(b) by declaring the entire action of the respondents in not considering the services of the petitioners for reallotment to the State of Telangana having regard to their local status and long service rendered in the said State consequent to the abolition of A.P.Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad vide Notification G.S.R. 30(E) dated 14-01-2020 and the Amended Notification S.O.886(E) dated 27-02-2020, while considering the cases of other similarly situated erstwhile A.P.A.T employees vide Order No.P-26012/1/2018-AT (Vol.1) of the 6th respondent in furtherance of orders of this Honble court in W.P.Nos.18559/2020 & W.P.No.3403/2021 r/w orders issued vide G.O.Ms.No.87 Finance (HRM.VII) Department, dt.15.07.2021 of the 4th respondent is as highly illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, violative of all principles of natural justice, opposed to equity principle.

c) and consequently to direct the respondents consider the cases of the petitioners herein for reallocation of their Services to the State of Telangana to that of other similarly situated employees whose services were reallocated vide Order No.P-26012/1/2018-AT (Vol.1) of the 6th respondent in furtherance of orders of this Honble Court in W.P.Nos.18559/2020, dt.22.01.2021 & W.P.No.3403/2021 dt.07.07.2021 r/w orders issued vide G.O.Ms.No.87 Finance (HRM.VII) Department, dt.15.07.2021 of the 4th respondent and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits the request for reallocation of the cadre of the petitioners to the State of Telangana is likely to be considered in view of some policy decision which has been arrived at between the two States. Therefore, he seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to the petitioners to approach this Court in case any adverse decision is taken.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents report no objection.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid libe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top