WP/23075/2023 of Syed Rashid Ali Vs High Court for the State of Telangana on 23 December 2025

[ 34Ee ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY

THE HoN,BLE SRIJusflc.!3ooo.o cHALAPATHI RAo WRIT PETITI ON NO: 2307 5 0F 2023

Between:

Syed Rashid Ali, S/o. Late Syed Razzak Ali, Age: 35 years, Senior Assistant, Presently workinq in Senior,Civir Judg;-Corrt. 'ri"krrureddy, Kamareddy Dist., Deputation at Court of I Addt oist. ano SesJ;;; jriig;, Kama-r-ed'dy " '-' --v, v'Jl

AND

1

...PETITIONER

By its Registrar General, High

High Court for the State of Telangana, rep Court Buildings, Hyderabad

2. The Principar District and Sessions Judge, Nizamabad, Nizamabad District.

3. The Principar District and sessions Judge, Kamareddy, Kamareddy District.

4. Smt. Ramavath Lalitha, .D/o^Bojya Nayak, Age about _ 34 years, Senior Assistant, Senior Civil Judge Cou'ri, SoOtian l.iizimabad District.

5 9Tl, 1. Any:tLa, D/o R Ravi Kumar, Age about _ 32 years, Senior Assistant, I

Addr. Judiciar First crass rr/agistrate, ttizamatao, ruizamioio ois-tii.i"-'"'""'

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Articre 226 of the constrtution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an approprate writ, order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ of Mandamus decraring the proceedings in Roc No.g6412022- c-1, dated 26 -10.2022 realocating in so far as this petitioner from Nizamabad District (under the contror of 2nd respondent) to the Kamareddy District (under the control of 3'd respondent) and simirarry rearocating sth respondent from Kamareddy District to Nizamabad District, and retaining 4th respondent in Nizamabad District, without consrdering the domicire of origin/nativity as we as senlorrty of the petitioner to the successor District (Nrz rmabad District), is in vioration to Guiderines for aflocation of Members of re angana state Judicial Ministerial and Subordinate services to the newry fc,r ned Judiciar Districts coterminous with the Revenue District, framed by the sommittee of Hon,ble Judges of Hon'bre Hrqh court for the state of Teranl )na, as being iregar, ultravires' capricious. unjust, against the principres of natur rr justice and fair pray, and arso in vioration lo pata-7 0f the presidentiar order, 2(r g, besides in vioration to Articres 14' 16' .19, 2'1 and 300-4 of constitution of Ir iia and consequenry direct the respondent No. i to re_allocate me to N z amabad District, by considering my representations dated 27.10.2022 and 1.12.,. 022.

lA NO: 1 oF 2023

Petition under Sectron 151 cpc praying that in the c r ;umstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High cour rn,y be preased to direct the respondent No.1 to considerrng my representations disposal of the wrrt petitjon.

re-allocate me to

daled 27 .10.2O22

Nrze rlabad District, by

and 1 .12 2022, pending

Counsel for the petitioner: Ms. T. DHANALAKSHMI, REPRE:l iENTING

SRI VONJARI RAJA SHEKAR REDDY TCTXNr rErr, NC_OOV

Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 3: SRI VIVEK JAIN

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI G. DINESH PATIL

Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI M. YADAGIRI

The Court made the following: ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT

HYDERABAD

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY

AND

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

WRIT PETITION NO.23075 0F 2023

Date;23.12.2025

Between:

Syecl Rashid Ali, s/o. late Syed Razzak Ali Petitioner

and

FIiilh Court for thc State of l elangar.ra, rep'bv its Registrar General, t{igh Court Buildings'

1 11,.1pp2bad and four others.

OI{DER

Ms

Responclents

(per Hon'blc Sri lrtstict P Sr.ltt Koslty)

l.Dhanalakshmi, iearned couusel representing Mr' V'Raja Shc'kar Reddy, learned counsel appcaring for the pciitioner submits tha t the're is assurance given by the responcleuts cousitlt'ring the petitioner for promotion. l{owever, penclency of the writ }at'tiriorl is comirrg in the way of DePartment in issuing nccessalry orclers' [n viewofthesame,thelearnedctlunselforpetitionerPlays for rt,ithdrawaI of the present writ Petltlon

2.

Accortlingly, the Writ Petiti()n is dismissed as lvithdrawn, rcscrv ing the right of the Petitioner to rel'ive the same in thc event of )

-

(

grievance of tl're 1-:etiiitlrrer still survives. There shall be no order as to COSTS

Consecluentlv, miscellaneous petitions perrdi rg, if an1', shall stanci closctl IS

//TRUE COPY//

'i One CC to SRi VONJARI RAJA SHEKAR F EDDY

REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]

2 One CC to SRI VIVEK JAIN, Advocate [OPUC]

3 One CC to SRI G DINESH PATIL, Advocate [OPUC:]

4 One CC to SRI tV YADAGIRI' Advocate [OPUC]

5 Two CD CoPies

l\

SD/.8. REKHA RANI

ISTANT REGISTRA[---:-7

\=

-j

SECTION OFFICER

VENKAT

RAI\,1

To

MP

BS N/

CC TODAY

HIGH COURT

DA.'-ED:2311212025

r ltr C 'r-,

*{;r.rl|'

t

'(\

,()

0()2

,.,1.

'.).: *

-'i.t i "

I 0[i,

1:

DFI.T'll :'