WP/37907/2021 of Nagaseshi Vs The State of Telangana on 31 December 2021

COMMON ORDER:

Heard Sri S. Surender Reddy, Sri Sadiq Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, Sri P. Sasidhar Reddy, Sri Banda Prasada Rao, Sri M. Ramgopal Rao, Sri Srinivasa Rao Madiraju, Sri Ramu Nallamothu, Sri P. Rajesh, Sri C. Raja Sekhar Reddy, Sri G. Bala Rangaiah, and Sri Rangarajula Rajasekhara Rao, counsel for the petitioners, and learned Government Pleader for Education appearing for the respondents.

Hussain,

2. Since the issue involved in all these writ petitions is one and the same, they are being heard together and disposed of by way of this common order.

3. The petitioners in all these writ petitions are working as Secondary Grade Teachers/ Language Pandits/ School Assistants/Head Masters. Their grievance is that while allotting the Districts in terms of the presidential order, the respondents have not properly considered their cases.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that G.O.Ms.No.317, dated 06.12.2021, makes it very clear that the allotment has to be made to the newly cropped up districts based upon the seniority and certain preferences were also given to the Widows/Medical exigencies/Schedule Tribe candidates/Schedule Caste candidates/Clerical mistakes etc. Learned counsel further contended that when the respondents have not considered the cases of the petitioners as per their seniority or preferential categories as mentioned in the guidelines vide G.O.Ms.No.317, dated 06.12.2021, the petitioners have submitted representations/appeals to the respondents, but so far, no orders have been passed thereon. Learned counsel further contended that appropriate orders be passed in all these writ petitions directing the respondents to consider the representations/appeals preferred by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law.

5. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents contended that since the representations/appeals preferred by the petitioners are pending with the respondents, the respondents would consider the same and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable period.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the view that all these writ petitions can be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representations/appeals preferred by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, on or before 10.01.2022.

7. Accordingly, all these Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs. Pending Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, shall also stand closed.

_______________________________________

JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI