APHC010179052022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE 16 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 11015/2022 BETWEEN: 1. YAGANA CHINNA, W/o. LATE PARAMATA VENKATA SURYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, RESIDENT OF OFFICIAL COLONY, VENKAMPETA, PARVATHIPURAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 1. THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TRIBAL WELFARE SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR CUM CHAIRMAN, INTEGRATED TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, PARVATHIPURAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 3. PROJECT OFFICER, INTEGRATED TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, PARVATHIP 4. DIRECTOR OF TRIBAL WELFARE, D.NO.40 NO.13, KONERU LAKSMAIAH STREET, MOGHALRAJPURAM, VIJAYAWADA. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE 16th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 11015/2022 YAGANA CHINNA, W/o. LATE PARAMATA VENKATA SURYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, RESIDENT OF OFFICIAL COLONY, VENKAMPETA, PARVATHIPURAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TRIBAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, ANDHRA DISTRICT COLLECTOR CUM CHAIRMAN, INTEGRATED TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, PARVATHIPURAM, VIZIANAGARAM PROJECT OFFICER, INTEGRATED TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, PARVATHIPURAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. DIRECTOR OF TRIBAL WELFARE, D.NO.40-3/1-46-4A, WARD NO.13, KONERU LAKSMAIAH STREET, MOGHALRAJPURAM, ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court [3330] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO YAGANA CHINNA, W/o. LATE PARAMATA VENKATA SURYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, RESIDENT OF OFFICIAL COLONY, VENKAMPETA, PARVATHIPURAM, ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, ANDHRA DISTRICT COLLECTOR CUM CHAIRMAN, INTEGRATED TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, PARVATHIPURAM, VIZIANAGARAM PROJECT OFFICER, INTEGRATED TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT URAM, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. 4A, WARD NO.13, KONERU LAKSMAIAH STREET, MOGHALRAJPURAM, ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court 2 may be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or Direction preferably a Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the Employees Provident and Back wages due to the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Article 14, 21 of the Constitution of India Provident Fund and Back wages with interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum which are due to the petitioner and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Y SUDHAKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: The petitioner herein filed I.D. No.543 of 1995 before the Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Visakhapatnam, assailing the removal from service. By way of Award dated 21.11.1998, the Industrial Tribunal allowed the I.D. No.543 of 1995 and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with back wages and continuity of service. Challenging the order in I.D. No.543 of 1995, the respondents have filed W.P. No.26060 of 1999 before the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad, and the same was dismissed on 09.03.2012, confirming the orders of Industrial Tribunal, passed in I.D. No.543 of 1995, the said order has become final and the petitioner is entitled for back wages. Now, the present Writ Petition is filed to direct the respondents to pay back wages. 2. Despite, lapse of four years, the respondents have not filed their counter affidavit. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein made a representation to the respondent authorities on 14.12.2021, requesting the authorities for implementation of the order in I.D. No.543 of 1995. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice if the Court directs the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 14.12.2021. 4 4. Therefore, the respondents are directed to dispose of the representation dated 14.12.2021 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. 5. With the above said direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 16.09.2026 Harin 5 60 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO W.P.No.11015 of 2022 Date: 16-09-2026 Harin