Telangana High Court
WP/40913/2014 of Smt. V.Jhansi Rani Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 31 December 2014
R.KANTHA RAO W.P.No.40913 of 2014 ORDER Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for School Education appearing for respondents 1 to 4. This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the inaction of the 1st respondent in disposing the appeal filed by
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Arguments
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO
W.P.No.40913 of 2014
ORDER
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner andlearned Government Pleader for School Education appearingfor respondents 1 to 4.
This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the inactionof the 1[st] respondent in disposing the appeal filed by the 5[th]respondent whereunder the orders of the 4[th] respondentdated 30.11.2010 and 30.10.2010 are stayed, even afterreceipt of the enquiry report from the 2[nd] respondent, asarbitrary and illegal.
The petitioner was appointed as Secondary GradeTeacher on 4.12.1997 in the 5[th] respondent-School. The 5[th]respondent vide letter dated 2.9.2010 suspended thepetitioner from service on the ground of unauthorizedabsence, without considering the explanation submitted bythe petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a writtenrepresentation to the 3[rd] respondent and in considerationthereof, the 3[rd] respondent passed the order directing the 4[th]respondent to reinstate the petitioner into serviceimmediately and pay the salaries. The 4[th] respondent videproceedings dated 30.10.2010 directed the petitioner toattend the duties immediately and vide proceedings dated30.11.2010 directed the 5[th] respondent to take her into service.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in order to cover their laches, the 5[th] respondent filedan appeal before the 1[st] respondent, who in turn, grantedstay of the orders passed by the 4[th] respondent. He furthersubmits that though the appeal was filed as far back in 2011,the 1[st] respondent has not yet disposed of the same.
It seems that the appeal filed by the 5[th] respondent is pending with the 1[st] respondent. Though the appeal was filedin 2011, the 1[st] respondent has not taken any steps fordisposal of the same.
Under these circumstances, the 1[st] respondent is directed to dispose of the appeal within a period of eightweeks from the date of receipt of a copy of his order.Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Thereshall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writpetition shall stand closed.
_________________________
JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO
31[st] December, 2014rkk