Telangana High Court
Ch. Sayanna vs The Controller on 11 August, 2025
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN
WRIT APPEAL No. 815 of 2025
JUDGMENT:
Heard K. Muralidhar Reddy, learned counsel appearing
for the appellant, who was respondent No.3 in Writ Petition
No.20797 of 2021, Smt. M. Shalini, learned Government
Pleader for Services-II appearing for respondent Nos.1 and
2/State and Sri N. Sharath Chandra Reddy, learned counsel
appearing for Sri Arvind Kumar Kata, learned counsel for
respondent No.3/writ petitioner.
2. B.Sc. (Maths) Degree Certificate issued by Janardan Rai
Nagar Rajasthan Vidyapeeth University (Deemed University),
Udaipur, Rajasthan, in favour of the appellant was declared
invalid in a proceeding No.2002/E/2017 dated 08.11.2020
issued by one Sri V. Anil Kumar, IAS (Retired), Controller,
Legal Metrology (FAC), Hyderabad, who was respondent
No.1 in the Writ Petition as well as in the present appeal. The
appellant being aggrieved thereby preferred an appeal before
the State Government. The proceeding dated 08.11.2020 was
2 HCJ (AKrS, J) & GMM, J
kept in abeyance by an interim order dated 02.02.2021 issued
by the Ex-Officio Secretary to Government, Consumer
Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies Department, State of
Telangana, Hyderabad, pending action, which was the subject
matter of Writ Petition No.20797 of 2021 at the behest of the
writ petitioner/respondent No.3 herein. The main ground of
challenge was that respondent No.2, Ex-Officio Secretary to
Government, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies
Department, State of Telangana, Hyderabad, is the same
person who had issued the first proceeding dated 08.11.2020.
Therefore, he could not sit in appeal over his own order. The
State Government in its counter-affidavit at paragraph Nos.3
and 6 made categorical statements. The said paragraphs are
extracted hereunder:
"3) I further submit that, aggrieved with the above said
proceedings Sri CH. Sayanna, STA, has submitted an
appeal petition dt:23.12.2020 to the Government,
requesting to set-aside the proceedings dt.8.11.2020 of the
Controller of Legal Metrology, Hyderabad. In this regard,
on the appeal of Sri CH. Sayanna, STA, after obtaining
orders in-circulation to the Hon'ble Minister for Civil
Supplies; Government have passed the orders keeping the
Proceedings No.2002/E/2017, dt.8.11.2020 of the CLM in
3 HCJ (AKrS, J) & GMM, J
abeyance, pending action, vide Govt.
Memo.No.1986/CS.I.LM/2020 dt: 02.02.2021.
6) In this connection, I respectfully submit that, as
Sri V. Anil Kumar, IAS (Retd), E.O. Secretary to
Government, CA, F & CS dept, who is also holding the
FAC of the post of Controller of Legal Metrology has
issued proceedings dated 8.11.2020 cancelling the entry in
the Service Register with regard to the B.Sc Degree
acquired by Sri Ch. Sayanna, STA, LM, on the ground of
non-recognition of franchisee (Study centre), in the
capacity of Controller and Legal Metrology, HoD. Later,
the appeal petition of the appellant Sri Ch. Sayanna, STA,
LM, has been circulated to the Hon'ble Minister for Civil
Supplies and Legal Metrology department for orders and
the Hon'ble Minister have considered the request of the
appellant. Accordingly, as Ex-Officio Secretary to Govt,
CA, F&CS dept., have issued Govt. Memo.No.1986/
CS.I.LM/2020 dt: 2.2.2021 by keeping the CLM
Procgs.No.2002/E/2017, dt.8.11.2020 in abeyance, duly
complying the orders passed by the Hon'ble Minister in the
matter."
3. The learned writ Court, after hearing the learned counsel
for the parties, set aside the order dated 02.02.2021, which
kept the original proceeding dated 08.11.2020 in abeyance, by
holding as under:
"15. Taking into consideration:-
a) The aforesaid circumstances
4 HCJ (AKrS, J) & GMM, J
b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for
Services-II appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 &
2 and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent
No.3.
c) The contents of the order vide proceedings No.2002/E/2017
of the 1st respondent dated 08.11.2020 (referred to and
extracted above)
d) The contents of the impugned order vide Memo
No.1986/CS.I-LM/2020 of the 2nd respondent dated
02.02.2021 (referred to and extracted above) in abeyance
without recording any reasons or a prima facie opinion
e) The averments made in the counter affidavit filed by the
respondent Nos.1 and 2.
f) The averments made in the affidavit filed by the petitioner
in support of the present writ petition in particular para Nos.
9 and 10 (referred to and extracted above) and the
averments made in para no. 9 of the reply affidavit filed by
the petitioner explaining petitioner's locus to file the
present writ petition.
g) The interim orders of this Court dated 02.09.2021 passed in
favour of the petitioner which are in force as on date
h) The observations of the various Courts in the judgments
(referred to and extracted above)
a) 2022 (5) ALD 54
b) AIR 1966 SC Page No 828
c) AIR 1964 SC Page No 685
d) AIR 2001 SC Page No 1739
The Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned memo
No. 1986/CS.I-LM/2020, dated 02.02.2021 issued in the
capacity of 2nd respondent and signed as V. Anil
5 HCJ (AKrS, J) & GMM, J
Kumar, Ex-officio Secretary to Government is set
aside."
4. It appears that the appeal preferred by the appellant
herein before the State Government is still pending. The action
taken by respondent No.1 vide proceeding dated 08.11.2020 is
the subject matter of the said appeal. The main proceeding
before the State Government in the appeal preferred by the
appellant is inchoate. In the midst of such proceedings, the
writ proceedings were initiated at the behest of the writ
petitioner in which the learned writ Court was persuaded to
interfere in the matter. Once the stand of the State Government
has been clarified at paras 3 and 6 of their counter-affidavit
that respondent No.2 was not the authority who kept the
original proceeding dated 08.11.2020 in abeyance, rather, he
was only the issuing authority of the order passed by the
Minister in-charge of the Department concerned, the matter
should have been allowed to rest there with a further direction
to ensure that the pending appeal proceedings are concluded
within a timeframe. The conclusion of the appeal proceedings
would only determine whether the status of B.Sc. (Maths)
6 HCJ (AKrS, J) & GMM, J
Degree Certificate of the appellant herein is valid or not.
Consequences arising out of such decision would have
followed thereafter. The writ petitioner has unnecessarily
approached the writ Court without waiting for the outcome of
the appeal proceedings pending before the State Government.
5. In such circumstances, we are inclined to issue following
directions while interfering with the order of the learned writ
Court as well.
The Department concerned has not been made a party in
the Writ Petition. However, respondent No.2, who is the
Ex-Officio Secretary to Government, Consumer Affairs, Food
and Civil Supplies Department, is represented by the learned
Government Pleader for Services-II. Let the Consumer
Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies Department, State of
Telangana, Hyderabad, be impleaded in the writ appeal. The
appeal preferred by the appellant herein is to be decided by the
State Government as per the delegation of powers under the
Rules of executive business. Learned counsel for the State
accepts notice on behalf of the newly added respondent.
7 HCJ (AKrS, J) & GMM, J
6. We therefore direct that the appeal preferred by the
appellant if pending before the State Department be disposed
of within a timeframe of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt
of a copy of this order. No action in the meantime would be
taken vis-à-vis the claim of service benefits of the appellant on
the basis of B.Sc. (Maths) Degree Certificate issued by
Janardan Rai Nagar Rajasthan Vidyapeeth University
(Deemed University), Udaipur, Rajasthan. Depending upon
the outcome of the appeal only, decision on the claim of the
appellant for admissible service benefits, like, promotion etc.,
would be taken by the Department. The appellant, if he is
aggrieved by the said decision, may have the remedy to
approach the appropriate forum in accordance with law. In
case such decision adversely affects the interest of the writ
petitioner, he will also have liberty to assail the decision taken
by the appellate authority before the appropriate forum in
accordance with law. The impugned order is interfered with in
the manner indicated hereinabove.
8 HCJ (AKrS, J) & GMM, J
Accordingly, the instant Writ Appeal stands disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
____________________________
APARESH KUMAR SINGH, CJ
_____________________
G.M.MOHIUDDIN, J
11th AUGUST, 2025.
kvni
