IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 419 of 2009 Between: K.Srinivasa Sarma S/o.Late K.V.S.Sarma R/o.Plot No.50, S.P.Nagar Moula Ali, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner & Secretary of Board of Intermediate Education,Latha complex,Nampally, Hyderabad 2 The Narayana Group of Educational Institutions, Vittalwadi Narayanaguda, Hyderabad, rep.by its Chairman 3 The Narayana Junior College, Vanasthalipuram Branch Hyderabad, rep.by its Principal .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction one in the nature of writ of mandamus: declaring the action of the 2nd &3rd respondents in not continuing the services of the petitioner as lecturer and not paying the salary from September 2008 onwards as arbitrary, illegal, violative of principles of natural justice contrary to the provisions of AP Education Act 1982 and violative of Article 14,21 of Constitution of India and consequently a direction may issued to continue the services of the petitioner as lecturer and to pay the salary regularly from September 2008 ii. a direction may be issued to the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal/representation dated 8.12.2008 & 31.12.2008. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.MAHENDER REDDY Counsel for Respondent No.1: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION Counsel for Respondent Nos.2 & 3: MR S.V.BHATT The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner is a postgraduate in Chemistry. Initially, he worked as Chemistry lecturer in various colleges. He joined in the second respondent institution in September, 2004. According to him, he has been terminated orally by the second respondent. He has filed an appeal before the first respondent against the oral termination and the same is stated to be pending for consideration. Assailing the inaction of the first respondent in disposing of his appeal, he approached this Court invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. When the writ petition came up for admission, notice before admission has been ordered on 20.01.2009. Respondents 2 and 3 entered appearance through a counsel. Learned Government Pleader for Higher Education received notice on behalf of the first respondent. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Higher Education appearing for respondent No.1 and the learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3. The limited grievance of the petitioner is that the first respondent is not taking up his appeal. In that view of the matter, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent- Commissioner and Secretary of Board of Intermediate Education, Nampally, Hyderabad, to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. _________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Date:17.02.2009 sj