The State Of Telangana vs P.Bixapathi Rao
2021 Latest Caselaw 1553 Tel

Item No.40


             THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
                                AND
             THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

               I.A.No.1 OF 2020 IN/AND W.A.No.112 OF 2020

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hima Kohli)

1.    The present appeal is directed against the innocuous order dated

23.04.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.6504 of 2018 filed by

the respondent praying inter alia for issuing directions to the appellants to

implement the order dated 26.03.2013 passed by the Administrative Tribunal in

O.A.No.9481 of 2010.

2. By the common order dated 26.03.2013 passed in three original

applications namely, O.A.Nos.9479, 9481 and 9483 of 2010, the learned

Tribunal had directed the appellants herein to fix the seniority of the applicants

on the post of Sub-Inspector (Civil) as per the marks secured by them in the

training conducted at the Police Academy, Hyderabad, in terms of the earlier

order dated 03.07.2008, passed by the learned Tribunal in O.A.No.5296 of 2006.

3. On enquiring from learned counsel for the parties as to whether the

appellants have preferred a writ petition against the common order dated

26.03.2013, passed in respect of O.A.No.9481 of 2010, Mr. Amarender, learned

counsel for the respondent states that only one writ petition has been filed by the

appellants in respect of O.A.No.9479 of 2010, registered as W.P.No.36993 of

2017, which is pending adjudication. He states that for reasons best known to

them, the appellants have not challenged the aforesaid common order passed in

all the three OAs by preferring three separate writ petitions and, therefore, they

cannot insist that the respondent ought to await the outcome of the captioned

writ petition that is pending.

4. The aforesaid position is not disputed by learned counsel for the

appellants. Therefore, it does not lie in the mouth of the appellants to contest

the merits of the findings returned by the learned Tribunal in the present appeal

under the garb of assailing the order dated 23.04.2018 wherein, the only

direction issued by the learned Single Judge to the appellants was to consider the

respondent's representation dated 08.12.2016 for implementation of the order

dated 26.03.2013, passed by the learned Tribunal in O.A.No.9481 of 2010,

within three months from the date of receipt of the said order. By now three

years have already expired, but the appellants have neither taken any steps to file

a separate writ petition to challenge the order dated 26.03.2013 passed in

O.A.No.9481 of 2010, nor have compliances of the impugned order been made,

particularly when no stay has been operating in their favour.

5. This court declines to go into the merits of the order passed by the learned

Tribunal as that is not the subject matter of the present appeal, that is limited to

assailing the order dated 23.04.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge, which

is found to be perfectly in order.

6. The present appeal and the interlocutory application are, accordingly,

dismissed as meritless along with the pending applications, if any.

_________________ HIMA KOHLI, CJ

______________________ B.VIJAYSEN REDDY, J 04.06.2021 Lrkm/pln