Telangana High Court
WP/29083/2009 of R. Padmanabha Reddy Vs The Mandal Parishad Development Officer, on 31 December 2009
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 29083 OF 2009 Between: R.Padmanabha Reddy ..... PETITIONER AND The Mandal Parishad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND NINE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI
WRIT PETITION No. 29083 OF 2009
Between:
R.Padmanabha Reddy
AND
..... PETITIONER
The Mandal Parishad Development Officer, BangarupalyamMandal,Chittoor District
.....RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Petitioner:
Counsel for the Respondent:The Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI
WRIT PETITION NO.29083 OF 2009
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:
This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the order passed by therespondent-Mandal Parishad Development Officer, dated 01.12.2009removing the petitioner from the post of Field Assistant in NREGScheme Programme in Bangarupalyam Mandal.
At the outset, it is to be noticed that as per CircularNo.7548/RD.V(1)/2008, dated 22.11.2008 issued by the Commissionerfor Rural Development, A.P., Hyderabad, an efficacious remedy ofappeal is available before the Project Director against the impugnedorder. Therefore, without exhausting such remedy the petitioner cannotmaintain this writ petition.
Accordingly, granting leave and liberty to the petitioner to preferan Appeal before the Project Director, DWMA, the Writ Petition isdisposed of. If any such appeal is preferred within two weeks fromtoday, status quo as on today shall be maintained till the disposal ofthe Appeal. No costs.
Dt. 31.12.2009 Ivd
_____________
G. ROHINI, J.