Telangana High Court
WP/33174/2010 of P.V. Appa Rao Vs Visakhapatnam Port Trust, represented by its Chairman, on 29 December 2010
NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No.33174 of 2010 Date: December 29, 2010 Between: P.V. Appa Rao … Petitioner And 1. Visakhapatnam Port Trust, rep. by its Chairman, Visakhapatnam and another. … Respondents * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.33174 of 2010
Date: December 29, 2010
Between:
P.V. Appa Rao … Petitioner
And
1. Visakhapatnam Port Trust,
rep. by its Chairman,
Visakhapatnam and another. … Respondents
* * *
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.33174 of 2010
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:
The writ petitioner, while working as a Hammer man in theOre Handling Complex of Visakhapatnam Port Trust, has beenimposed the punishment of compulsory retirement from service. The foundation for the said order was the conviction handed downto him by competent criminal court. The writ petitioner carried thematter in Criminal Appeal No.110 of 2008 and the MetropolitanSessions Judge-cum-I Additional District and Sessions Judge,Visakhapatnam by his judgment dated 18[th] February 2009 has setaside the conviction and sentence dated 25[th] July 2008 renderedin C.C. No.549 of 2005. In view of the reversal of the convictionand sentence of the trial court, the writ petitioner was reinstated toduty on 27[th] May 2009 as a Hammer man.
2. His grievance is that the interregnum period between theorder of punishment and reinstatement has not been regularised so far as a result of which several consequences are suffered byhim such as not releasing the annual grade increments dulyraising his pay and consideration of his case for further promotionetc. He has submitted a detailed representation to the Chairmanof the Visakhapatnam Port Trust in that regard on 17[th] June 2010. No orders are said to be passed thereon.
3. If the Chairman of the Visakhapatnam Port Trust considersthe representation/appeal submitted by the writ petitioner on 17[th]June 2010 and passes appropriate orders thereon perhaps that willput at rest, to the extent permissible under law, the grievance ofthe writ petitioner.
4. I therefore consider it appropriate to direct the Chairman ofthe Visakhapatnam Port Trust to take up the representation/appealsaid to have been submitted by the writ petitioner on 17[th] June2010 and deal with the same as expeditiously as possible anddispose of preferably within a period of three months from the dateof receipt of a copy of this order.
5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of at theadmission stage after hearing Smt. V. Uma Devi, learned standingcounsel for Visakhapatnam Port Trust and with her consent.
________________________________
NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, JDate: December 29, 2010.BSB