High CourtsDivision Bench(2023) 11 TEL CK 0070

Telangana Prantha Upadhaya Sangam vs Election Commission Of India

Telangana High Court · Decided on 29 November 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Aradhe, CJ · Anil Kumar Jukanti, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 32623 Of 2023

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

8 paragraphs · 280 words
1.

Mr. P.Shashi Kiran, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Avinash Desai, learned Senior Counsel representing Ms. Divya Adepu, learned Standing Counsel for Election Commission of India for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

2.

The petitioner in this writ petition has prayed for the following relief:

“For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, the Petitioner herein prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not taking steps for issuance of postal ballots to teachers and employees on election duty across the State of Telangana as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 of Constitution of India apart from being violative of Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 and Conduct of Election rules 1961, and consequently to direct the respondents to issue postal ballots to all employees on election duty as mandated by the The RP act and the rules made there under and pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

3.

Learned Senior Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 on instructions submits that the postal ballots have already been issued to teachers and employees and by yesterday, about 1.75 lakhs of teachers and employees have already cast their votes.

4.

The aforesaid submission is placed on record.

5.

The grievance of the petitioner stands redressed. Therefore, no orders are required to be passed in this writ petition.

6.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.