High CourtsDivision Bench(2022) 02 TEL CK 0079

Mohd. Abdul Jahangir OD HG 2669 vs State Of Telangana

Telangana High Court · Decided on 24 February 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Satish Chandra Sharma, CJ · Abhinand Kumar Shavili, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Appeal No. 67 Of 2021

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 401 words

The present writ appeal is arising out of an order dated 03.02.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.45900 of 2018. The said order was a common order passed in W.P.No.20636 of 2017 and other connected matters, which includes W.P.No.45900 of 2018.

The facts of the case reveal that large number of Home Guard personnel were discontinued by the Department either on the ground of misconduct or on the ground of physical fitness or for some other reason, without following the principles of natural justice and fair play. Some Original Applications were preferred before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal and some petitions were preferred before this Court also. The Original Applications preferred before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal have been transferred to this Court. This Court in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh v. P.Prasad Rao 2012 (1) ALD 76 (DB) as well as in the subsequent cases i.e., W.P.No.35460 of 2013 and batch decided on 08.06.2018 has laid down certain parameters for reinstating the Home Guard personnel subject to physical fitness test. In some of the leftover matters, a common order was passed and all the counsel appearing in the matters consented for a common order in terms of the judgment dated 08.06.2018 rendered by this Court in W.P.No.35460 of 2013 and batch, which was affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.14162 of 2019, dated 26.07.2019. Meaning thereby, the appellant herein has also agreed for a common order and in those circumstances, an order has been passed, which is under challenge.

Learned counsel for the appellant has argued before this Court that the appellant was removed on the ground of misconduct.

In the considered opinion of this Court, the cases of removal on the ground of misconduct have also been considered in the earlier round and in all the cases a common order was passed for conducting physical test by putting the writ petitioners on notice in advance and the physical test is to be conducted based upon the relaxed standards. As the appellant himself has consented for the common order as passed in W.P.No.35460 of 2013 and batch decided on 08.06.2018, the question of interference with the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge does not arise.

The writ appeal is accordingly dismissed.

The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.