Telangana High Court
Telangana State Road Transport ... vs M.Sammaiah, on 25 March, 2022
Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, Abhinand Kumar Shavili
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT APPEAL Nos.196, 215, 281 and 319 of 2017
COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
Regard being had to the similitude in the controversy
involved in the present cases, the writ appeals were
analogously heard and by a common judgment, they are
being disposed of by this Court.
The facts of the W.A.No.196 of 2017 are as follows:-
The present writ appeal is arising out of an order
dated 21.09.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge in
W.P.No.25761 of 2016. The said writ petition was disposed
of along with other connected writ petitions i.e.,
W.P.No.24323 of 2012 and batch.
Learned counsel for the appellants, at the outset, has
drawn the attention of this Court towards the judgment
delivered in W.A.No.380 of 2017 and batch decided on
05.06.2017 and his contention is that in the light of the
judgment of the Division Bench, which is again based upon
the judgment delivered in the case of Andhra Pradesh
2
State Road Transport Corporation v. B.S.Reddy1 the
present writ appeal also deserves to be disposed of with a
liberty to the respondent to avail the remedies in terms of
the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the aforesaid case. The operative portion of the order
passed by the Division Bench is reproduced as under:-
"As held by the Supreme Court, on leave being granted
by the Supreme Court and on a Civil Appeal being disposed of
on merits, the order of the High Court merges with the order
of the Supreme Court. Consequently, the order of the
Supreme Court in the Civil Appeal would constitute a
declaration of law and a precedent binding on the High Court.
Unlike a Civil Appeal, where the doctrine of merger applies,
dismissal of a Special Leave Petition, that too without reasons,
does not attract the doctrine of Merger; and consequently the
judgment of the High Court remains in force. Unlike the order
in S.L.P(CC).No.1438 of 2014 dated 07.02.2014, whereby the
SLP was dismissed without reasons, consequent upon which
the order of the Division Bench in W.A.No.739 of 2013 dated
25.06.2017 continues to remain in force, the order of the
Supreme Court, in Civil Appeal No.3529 of 2017 dated
23.02.2017, has resulted in the orders passed earlier by the
Division Bench of this Court getting merged with the order of
the Supreme Court; and the law declared, in Civil Appeal
No.3529 of 2017 dated 23.02.2017, by the Supreme Court is
binding on us.
Following the order of the Supreme Court, in Civil Appeal
No.3529 of 2017 and batch dated 23.02.2017, these Writ
Appeals are also disposed of holding that the benefit of
Section 47 of the Act shall be available only to those who are
covered by the disabilities specified in Section 2(i) of the Act; it
(2008) 12 SCC 704
is open to the appellant-Corporation to take a decision, on
individual grievances of the respondent-writ petitioners, with
utmost expedition preferably within three months from the
date of receipt of a copy of the order; and the respondent-writ
petitioners are at liberty thereafter to avail their remedies in
terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court. Miscellaneous
Petitions pending, if any, shall also stand disposed of. There
shall be no order as to costs."
In the light of the aforesaid, no further orders are
required to be passed in the present writ appeals and they
are being disposed of in terms of the judgment passed in
W.A.No.380 of 2017 and batch decided dated 05.06.2017.
The said judgment shall be applicable mutatis mutandis in
the present cases also.
A copy of the judgment passed in W.A.No.380 of 2017
and dated 05.06.2017 shall be kept in the file of the
present cases.
The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
stand closed.
______________________________________
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ
______________________________________
ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J
25.03.2022
vs
