Prof. S. Murali Mohan vs. Etlam Prabhakara Reddy
Court:High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Judge:Hon'ble D.V.S.S.Somayajulu
Case Status:Dismissed
Order Date:7 May 2021
CNR:APHC010179962021
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Miscellaneous Matters(Pre Admission Misc.Petition)
Before:
Hon'ble Arup Kumar Goswami , C.Praveen Kumar
Listed On:
7 May 2021
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE: W.A.No.277 of 2021
PROCEEDINGS SHEET
| Sl.<br>No. | DATE | ORDER | OFFICE<br>NOTE |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 07.05.2021 | (Taken up through video conferencing) | |
| I.A.No.1 of 2021 | |||
| This<br>is<br>an<br>application<br>to<br>dispense<br>with<br>the | |||
| requirement of filing certified copy of the order under | |||
| challenge in this writ appeal. | |||
| Prayer is allowed. | |||
| I.A.No.1 of 2021 stands disposed of. | |||
| I.A.No.2 of 2021 | |||
| Heard Mr. Srinivasa Rao Bodduluri, learned counsel | |||
| for the appellants. | |||
| Also heard the learned Government Pleader for | |||
| Education for respondent No.2,<br>Mr. N.A. Ramachandra | |||
| Murthy, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4, | |||
| and Mr. Ponnavolu Sudhakara Reddy, learned Additional | |||
| Advocate General representing Mr. Koppineedi Rambabu, | |||
| learned standing counsel for respondent No.5. | |||
| This is an application seeking leave to prefer appeal | |||
| against the common order dated 05.03.2021 passed in | |||
| W.P.No.23770<br>of<br>2017<br>and<br>batch.<br>This<br>appeal<br>is | |||
| preferred in connection with W.P.No.22226 of 2018. | |||
| The plea of the appellants<br>is that they<br>were<br>not | |||
| made parties<br>to the writ proceedings and yet, their | |||
| appointment orders came to be interfered with. | |||
| W.A.No.214 of 2021 had also arisen against the | |||
| said common order dated 05.03.2021 in respect of | |||
| W.P.No.10813 of 2018. As the<br>appellants therein were | |||
| also third parties to the proceedings, an application, being | |||
| I.A.No.2 of 2021, seeking leave to appeal was filed. In the | |||
| said application, while granting leave, this Court had | |||
| passed the following order on 08.04.2021: | |||
| "This is<br>an application seeking leave to | |||
| prefer appeal. |
| Sl.<br>No. | DATE | ORDER | OFFICE<br>NOTE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Heard<br>Motupalli<br>Mr.<br>Vijaya<br>Kumar, | |||
| learned counsel for the applicants/appellants. | |||
| Also<br>heard<br>Mr.<br>P.<br>B. Vijaya<br>Kumar, | |||
| learned counsel for respondents 1 to 8, learned | |||
| Government Pleader for Higher Education for | |||
| respondent No.9, Mr. P. Venugopal, learned | |||
| counsel<br>for<br>respondents<br>10,<br>and<br>11<br>Mr. | |||
| Addanki<br>Ramachandra<br>Murthy,<br>learned | |||
| Standing Counsel for respondent No.12. | |||
| the<br>of<br>the<br>learned<br>It<br>is<br>contention | |||
| counsel for the applicants/appellants that the | |||
| learned single Judge had posed a question, | |||
| namely, whether the reservations provided for | |||
| deprived sections of the society and women, | |||
| are applicable to the posts of Professors also | |||
| and then recorded a finding that there will be | |||
| no reservation for deprived sections of the | |||
| society for the posts of Professors. He submits | |||
| that<br>though<br>the<br>appointments<br>of<br>the | |||
| applicants/appellants, who were appointed as | |||
| Professors, are<br>not challenged<br>in the Writ | |||
| Petition,<br>such<br>appointments<br>be<br>to<br>came<br>interfered with. | |||
| Having heard the learned counsel for the | |||
| parties, we deem it appropriate to grant leave | |||
| to prefer appeal. | |||
| Leave is, accordingly, granted. | |||
| I.A. stands disposed of. | |||
| will<br>list<br>this<br>appeal<br>for<br>Registry | |||
| admission, on 15.04.2021" | |||
| Mr. Srinivasa Rao Bodduluri, learned counsel for | |||
| the appellants, draws the attention of the Court to an | |||
| order dated 17.12.2018 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2018 in | |||
| W.P.No.20227 of 2018, wherein it was recorded that for | |||
| the post of Professor, there is no reservation at all. It is | |||
| also pointed out by him that in the common order under |
| Sl.<br>No. | DATE | ORDER | OFFICE<br>NOTE |
|---|---|---|---|
| challenge, the learned single Judge<br>had noted<br>that | |||
| reservation is provided for only to the posts of Assistant | |||
| Professors and Associate Professors.<br>He submits that in | |||
| the<br>appointment<br>orders,<br>it<br>was<br>indicated<br>that<br>the | |||
| appointments are subject to the decision/direction by any | |||
| court of law. He further submits that there was no Court | |||
| order<br>indicating<br>that<br>appointment<br>of<br>the | |||
| applicants/appellants would be subject to the result of the | |||
| writ petition. | |||
| Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, | |||
| we deem it appropriate to grant leave to prefer appeal. | |||
| Accordingly, leave is granted. | |||
| I.A.No.2 of 2021 stands disposed of. | |||
| W.A.No.277 of 2021 | |||
| In view of granting leave to appeal, this appeal is | |||
| admitted. | |||
| No formal steps are required so far as respondent | |||
| Nos.2,<br>4<br>and<br>5<br>are<br>concerned,<br>as<br>they<br>are<br>duly | |||
| represented. | |||
| Steps for service of notice upon respondent No.1 | |||
| by registered post with acknowledgement due. | |||
| Notice to respondent No.3 may be served upon | |||
| Mr. P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel, as he is stated | |||
| to be the standing counsel. | |||
| List this appeal along with W.A.No.214 of 2021. | |||
| I.A.No.3 of 2021 | |||
| This is an application praying for grant of interim | |||
| stay of operation of the order dated 19.04.2021 issued by | |||
| the 5th respondent-University. | |||
| Mr. Srinivasa Rao Bodduluri, learned counsel for | |||
| the appellants, submits that in I.A.No.3 of 2021 in | |||
| W.A.No.214 of 2021, by an order passed on 22.04.2021, | |||
| this Court had suspended the order dated 05.03.2021 so | |||
| far as it related to the appellants in the said appeal and | |||
| that apart, the e-mails stated to have been issued | |||
| cancelling the appointment of the appellants therein were | |||
| Sl.<br>No. | DATE | ORDER | OFFICE<br>NOTE |
|---|---|---|---|
| also directed not to be given effect to and the appellants | |||
| therein were allowed to continue in service until further | |||
| orders. It is submitted that on 19.04.2021, the Registrar | |||
| of respondent No.5-University had also issued orders | |||
| cancelling the appointment of the appellants. | |||
| On due consideration, we suspend the order dated | |||
| 05.03.2021 in W.P.No.22226 of 2018 and batch so far as | |||
| it relates to the appellants<br>herein. The order<br>dated | |||
| 19.04.2021 stated to have been issued by the Registrar of | |||
| respondent No.5-University, cancelling the appointment of | |||
| the appellants, shall not be given effect to and the | |||
| appellants<br>shall be allowed to continue in service until | |||
| further orders. | |||
| ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CJ<br>C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J | |||
| MRR/IBL/Nn | |||
| Sl. | DATE | ORDER | OFFICE |
|---|---|---|---|
| No. | NOTE | ||
Share This Order
Case History of Orders
Similar Case Search