Telangana High Court
M.Rajender vs The District Educational Officer ... on 25 October, 2021
Bench: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT PETITION No. 25730 of 2021
ORDER:
This writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage
with the consent of both parties.
2. This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
"...to issue a Writ, Order or Orders more particularly
one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the
respondents to grant notional service to the petitioner
from 18.01.2002 in the cadre of Secondary Grade
Teacher (SGT) on par with the 1st batch of DSC-2001
candidates by extending the benefit of proceedings
Rc.No.1405/Ser.III-1/2018 dated 4-1-2020 issued by the
3rd respondent and consequential proceedings dated
15-2-2021 issued by the 2nd respondent in respect of
similarly situated teachers in terms of judgment of this
Hon'ble Court dated 16-4-2018 in W.P.No.36811/2013
wherein the judgment of the Hon'ble Tribunal dated
27-2-2013 in OA.No.193/2012 was upheld with all
consequential benefits, by holding the action of the
respondents in not considering the petitioner's
representation dated 23-6-2021 for notional service on
par with similarly situated teachers and further not
extending the similar benefits of the judgment dated
16-4-2018 in WP.No.36811/2013 as illegal, arbitrary,
discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of
the Constitution of India and pass such other order or
orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in
the circumstances of the case."
3. Heard Sri Ch. Jagannatha Rao, counsel for the petitioner, and
the Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the respondents.
2 AKS,J
W.P.No.25730_2021
4. It has been contended by the petitioner that initially he was
appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher (SGT) through proceedings
dated 04.10.2002. The grievance of the petitioner is that he is entitled
to notional seniority from 18.01.2002 on par with his batchmates.
5. Counsel for the petitioner contended that similar issue has come
up before the then Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in
O.A.No.193 of 2012 and the Tribunal vide orders dated 27.02.2013
was pleased to allow the O.A. Counsel further contended that
aggrieved by the orders dated 27.02.2013 passed by the Tribunal, the
State has preferred W.P.No.36811 of 2013 before this Court and this
Court was pleased to dismiss the said writ petition on 16.04.2018
confirming the orders passed by the Tribunal. Counsel also contended
that the case of the petitioner also stands on the same lines as that of
the applicants in O.A.No.193 of 2012 and the petitioner has submitted
a detailed representation to the respondents on 23.06.2021 requesting
the respondents to extend him the similar benefit of the orders passed
in O.A.No.193 of 2012 dated 27.02.2013, but so far the respondents
have not passed any orders on the said representation. Therefore,
counsel contended that appropriate orders be passed in the writ
petition directing the respondents to consider the representation
submitted by the petitioner on 23.06.2021 and pass appropriate orders
in accordance with law.
6. Government Pleader appearing for the respondents had
contended that since the petitioner's representation is pending with the
3 AKS,J
W.P.No.25730_2021
respondents, the respondents would consider the same and pass
appropriate orders in accordance with law.
7. This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by
learned counsel for respective parties, is of the considered view that
this writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to
consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 23.06.2021
and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a
reasonable period of time, preferably within a period of eight weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No
order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________
ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J
25-10-2021
vv
