Legal Briefs | CAT Tells Telangana Govt to Give Posting Orders to Forester
Hyderabad: The Central Administrative Tribunal has directed the state government to forthwith give posting orders to an officer in the forest department. The panel of Lata Bhasavaraj Patniji and Varun Sindhu Kaunnidu was dealing with an original petition filed by Dr Ratnakar Gauhari complaining that he had been running from pillar to post to obtain a posting in the Telangana cadre to which he belongs. The Centre in July 2023 declared the appellant to be on the Telangana cadre. It reiterated the same in September 2023. In an earlier application, the government was directed to consider the matter. Continuing to stonewall the applicant’s attempt, the state government refused to entertain co-related matters and said that giving him posting orders was not feasible. After calling for immediate instructions in the matter and dissatisfied with the explanation offered, the panel directed compliance of the orders of Centre and consequently gave him a posting order. The state government was called upon to report compliance immediately after the Dasara vacation.
HC clarifies on retrospective effect
A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court declared that the amendment to Excise Act albeit retrospectively will not still purge the state government of its responsibility to pay back the remission amounts due for license fee collected under the earlier excise rules. A panel of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao was dealing with a writ plea challenging an amendment to sub-section 3 of Section 20 of the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act 1968. K. Ramakrishna, counsel for the petitioner, pointed out that in the relevant excise year, there were six compulsory holidays for which the petitioners were entitled to remission. However, by Act 1 of 2010, the law was amended withdrawing such right to remission in favour of the excise contractor, on the said ground and on the ground that the petitioner agreed to be governed by the terms and conditions modified from time to time, the petitioners claim for remission was rejected leading to the present writ petition. The panel found the agreement envisaged the changes during the pendency of the contract and the amendment for contracts in operation. Neither, the panel pointed out, applied to the petitioners. The court found that while the government had the power to make amendments with retrospective effect, in the instant case it could not be made applicable since the liability to make payments arose well before the amendments were made. The panel accordingly allowed the writ petition and directed payments of the amounts due to the petitioner.
HC issues notices on doctor’s plea
Justice Pulla Karthik of Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the actions of the state labour, employment, training and factories department and other authorities in not considering the promotion of a civil surgeon. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Dr A. Kanthi Sagar, complaining that the respondent authorities had failed to include his name in the list of candidates placed before the departmental promotion committee. The petitioner stated that he was fully qualified and eligible to be promoted to the post of special grade civil surgeon. The petitioner also alleges that the non-inclusion of his name by the respondent authorities was highly arbitrary and in violation of the Constitution. The judge after hearing the petitioner directed the respondent authorities to get instructions.
