Telangana High Court
WP/42460/2015 of Md. Shamiyullah Vs Telangana Grameena Bank Head Office AND Coporate on 31 December 2015
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN Present HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.42460 of 2015 Between: Md. Shamiyullah, S/o. Late Md.Bismillah, Aged
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABADFOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OFANDHRA PRADESH
THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN
Present
Between:
Md. Shamiyullah,S/o. Late Md.Bismillah,Aged about 50 years,R/o.H.No.10-6-86, Kishannagar,Karimnagar.
.. Petitioner
AND
Telangana Grameena Bank,Head Office & Corporate Office,Nallakunta, Hyderabad,Rep. by Appellate Authority-Board & another
.. Respondents
The Court made the following:
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.
ORDER:
Disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner on02.01.2015 resulted in imposing the punishment of reduction ofbasic pay by two stages for a period of two years as per the paystructure of the respondent bank with further directions not to earnincrements and not eligible for promotion during the period ofsuch reduction.
2. Against the said order, according to the ServiceRegulations governing the conditions of service of the employeesof Telangana Grameena Bank, an appeal shall lie to theappellate authority. Without exhausting the remedy of appeal,the petitioner instituted this writ petition. The only reasonassigned by the petitioner in para 6 of the affidavit for notpreferring the appeal is that he was mentally disturbed since theyear 2012 to till the date of filing of the writ petition and, therefore,he could not prefer appeal.
3. The reason assigned is not a ground for not filingappeal. It is always open to the petitioner to seek condonation ofdelay by assigning due reasons for not filing appeal in time. When right of appeal is provided, without exhausting the saidremedy, this writ petition could not have been instituted. It is always open to seek condonation of delay in filing appeal byassigning due reasons.
4. Since the petitioner has right of appeal providedunder the Service Regulations governing the petitioner, the writpetition at this stage cannot be entertained.
5. Leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the remedy ofappeal as well as seeking for condonation of delay in filing theappeal, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order asto costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writpetition shall stand closed.
_____________________
P.NAVEEN RAO, J
Date: 31[st] December, 2015
KL
Date: 31[st] December, 2015
KL