Telangana High Court
M. Satyanarayana Reddy vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh on 26 October, 2022
Bench: Abhinand Kumar Shavili, Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT HYDERABAD
(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
TUESDAY THE NINTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
: PRESENT :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE: BILAL NAZKI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE: P.S. NARAYANA
W.P. No.1793 of 2004
Between:
M. Satyanarayana Reddy
Petitioner
AND
1.The Govt. of A.P., rep. by its Special Chief Secretary, Panchyat Raj & Rural
Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.
2.The Engineer-in-Chief (A), Panchayat Raj Department, Hyderabad.
3.M. Narasimha Rao, Working as I/C Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Division,
Hyderabad.
4.V. Janga Reddy, Working as I/C Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Division,
Nagarkurnool, Mahabubnagar District.
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the
circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein, the High Court will be pleased to
issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari
call for the records relating to order dated 9-12-2003 passed in O.A.No.9800/2001
by the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh Administrative tribunal and quash the same by
holding it as illegal, bad and arbitrary and also to declare clause (b) under column-2
against category-5 of the table under rule-2 and clause(b) under colomn-2 to rule-4
as amended in A. P.Panchayat Raj Engineering Service Rules vide G.O.Ms.No.662
Panchayat Raj Department dated 24-11-1987 as unconstitutional, being violative of
Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India and quash the said rule in the interest of
justice.
The petition coming on for hearing, as to admission, upon perusing the
petition and the affidavit filed herein and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.M. Ratna
Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner, the Govt. Pleader for Panchayat Raj on behalf of
Respondents 1 and 2 and of Mr. M. Lakshma Reddy, Advocate for Respondents 3
and 4.
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER:
"It is submitted at the bar that the judgment of the Tribunal in this case is
based on a judgment of the Full Bench reported in U.Govinda Rao & others Vs.
Government of A.P. & others (2002(1) ALD 347), which is the subject matter of an
S.L.P. before Supreme Court. According to the Counsels, leave has been granted
by the Supreme Court, but the operation of judgment has not been stayed. In this
view of the matter, we admit the Writ Petition, issue rule nisi and direct that it should
be listed for final hearing after the appeal is decided by the Supreme court against
the judgment cited above. The
:: 2 ::
Tribunal however makes it judgment of prospective. Prima facie we are, of the
opinion that the Tribunal has no authority to make a judgment's operation
prospectives. Therefore we stay that portion of the judgment."
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
// TRUE COPY //
for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
To
1.The Registrar, A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad.
2.The Special Chief Secretary, Panchyat Raj & Rural Development Department,
Govt. of A.P, Secretariat, Hyderabad.
3.The Engineer-in-Chief (A), Panchayat Raj Department, Hyderabad.
4.M. Narasimha Rao, Working as I/C Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Division,
Hyderabad.
5.V. Janga Reddy, Working as I/C Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj Division,
Nagarkurnool, Mahabubnagar District.
6.Two CCs to G.P. for Panchayat Raj, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad (OUT)
7.One Spare Copy.
H.A.
DRAFTED BY : H.A.
COMPARED BY :
HIGH COURT
BNJ
&
PSNJ
DT: 09-03-2004
ORDER :
WP NO.1793 OF 2004 DIRECTION