Telangana High Court

WP/23721/2004 of G. Kotaiah S/o Venkateswarlu Vs The District Panchayat Officer, on 30 December 2004

Cites 0, Cited by 0

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. BIKSHAPATHY and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO : 23721 of 2004 Between: G. Kotaiah, S/o.

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. BIKSHAPATHY

and

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA

WRIT PETITION NO : 23721 of 2004

Between:

G. Kotaiah, S/o. Venkateswarlu, Bill Collector (NMR), Gram Panchayat Kodad, Nalgonda District (Under Orders of Transfer to Gram Panchayat Nereducherla, Nalgonda Dist)

..... PETITIONER

AND

1 The District Panchayat Officer, Nalgonga.

2 The Panchayat Secrtary, Kodad Gram Panchayat, Nalgodna District.

3 The Panchayat Secretary, Nereducherla, Nalgonda District. .....RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased toissue a Writ order or direction more in the nature of Certiorari calling for the recordsrelating to the order of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 5651 of 2004dated 14-10-2004 and the Proc. No. 529/04-B1(Pts), dt 21-6-2004 and the proc. No.529/04-B1(PTs), dated 2-9-2004 issued by the District Panchayat Officer, Nalgondaand set-a side the same and hold that the petitioner is entitled to continue as NMRBill collector, in Gram Panchayat, Kodad with all consequential benefits.

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.D.BALA KISHAN RAO

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES-II.

The Court at the admission stage made the following:

ORAL ORDER:-(PER GB,J.)

This Writ Petition is filed assailing the order, dated 14.10.2004 passed by the A.P.Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.5651 of 2004.

2. The petitioner was transferred on the directions of the District Panchayat Officer,Nalgonda, who is first respondent herein, from Kodad Gram Panchayat toNereducherla Gram Panchayat vide proceedings No.529/04-B1 (Pts), dated21.6.2004. The said order came to be challenged by the petitioner in the O.A.

3. The Tribunal dismissed the O.A. by observing as follows:

“This Tribunal perused the material on record. As the District PanchayatOfficer, who is the competent authority, has passed the orders, it is the duty ofthe Sarpanch to honour the orders and admit the applicant. Instead of doing so,he has chosen to seek cancellation of transfer orders and continue theapplicant at Kodad Grampanchayat of Nalgonda District. However, the DistrictPanchayat Officer has directed the Sarapanch, by his orders dated 2.9.2004 toadmit the applicant to duty. As the transfer ordered by the District PanchayatOfficer is purely on administrative grounds it does not warrant any interferenceby the Tribunal.

Accordingly, the O.A. is held as devoid of merits and it is dismissed.”

are separate units. He also submits that when the regularization of service takesplace, petitioner will lose the regularization of his service and he further submits thatNereducherla is 150 kms away from Kodad and it will cause innumerable hardshipto the petitioner.

5. We are afraid we cannot accept the contentions of the learned counsel for thepetitioner.

6. In fact, it is the District Panchayat Officer to shift the persons from one place toother place depending on the requirement. The learned counsel for the petitionerfurther submits that it is contrary to the directions of the Government.

7. Under those circumstances, we leave it open to the petitioner to make appropriaterepresentation to the Government, which can be filed by him within a period of fourweeks, and the same shall be considered in accordance with law.

8. Subject to the above observation, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.

__________________

G. BIKSHAPATHY, J.

_______________

P.S. NARAYANA, J.

To

1 The Registrar, A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad.

2 The District Panchayat Officer, Nalgonga.

3 The Panchayat Secrtary, Kodad Gram Panchayat, Nalgodna District.

4 The Panchayat Secretary, Nereducherla, Nalgonda District.

5 2 CCs to the G.P. for Services-II, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT)

6 2CD copies.

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead