APHC010067352023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 3369/2023 Between: 1. P RAVICHANDRA RAJU, S/O GOVINDA RAJU AGE 60 YEARS, OCC.-JR. ASST. 0/0 DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT OFFICER.ANANTHAPURAM, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT OFFICER, ANANTHAPURAM, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND CHAIRMAN SMPC, ANANTHAPURAM, ANANTHAPURM DISTRICT. 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, AP STATE CO-OPERATIVE RURAL IRRIGATION CORPORATION LTD. H.NO.52-113-4/4 C ROAD NO. 1 B. NTR COLONY, VIJAYAWADA KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, AGRICULTURE AND CO-OPERATION DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...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 may be pleased topleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS,.- (a) by declaring that the entire action of the respondents, particularly the entire action of the 1st respondent in not 2 extending the benefit of age of superannuation upto 62 years in terms of orders issued by the Govt., in G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.IV.FRandLR) Dept., dated 31.01.2022 despite of request of the petitioners is as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, improper, contrary to orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.138, dated 08.08.2017 and judgment of Hon'ble Apex court in SLP Nos.14033- 14034/2017 dated 05.05.2017, including orders of Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP No.13623/2017, dated 09.08.2017 in the matter of applicability of age of superannuation to the petitioners on par with Government servants. (b) and further hold that the petitioner herein is entitled for continuation of his services upto the age of 62 years in terms of orders issued by the Govt.. vide G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.IV-FRandLR) Dept., dated 31.01.2022 on account that in earlier, the services of all employees working in corporations/ societies included in the IX and X Schedules of the AP Reorganization Act, vide G.O.Ms.No.138 Finance (HR.IV-FR) Dept., dated 08.08.2017, extended the benefit of superannuation on par with Govt., servants including petitioners and the Hon'ble Apex Court also held that, the corporation employees also entitled for such enhancement of age of superannuation on par with Govt., servants. (c) and consequently to direct the respondents to continue the services of the petitioner till up to the age of 62 years with all consequential benefits by extending the same benefit that was extended to the employees in G.O. Ms. No. 15 Finance (HR.1V-FR and LR) Dept., dated. 31.01.2022 keeping in view of the earlier orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.138 Finance (HR.1V-FR) Dept., dated 08.08.2017 r/w orders of Hon'ble Apex Court in SLA(c) Nos.14033- 14034/2017 dated 29.01.2020 as well as orders of Hon'ble High Court in WP No.3021/2018 dated 11.10.2018 and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondents to continue the services of the petitioner till up to the age of 62 years with all consequential benefits by extending the same benefit that was extended to the employees in G.O. Ms. No. 15 Finance (HR.1V-FR & LR) Dept., dated. 31.01.2022 keeping in view of the earlier orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.138 Finance (HR.IV-FR) Dept., dated 08.08.2017 r/w orders of Hon'ble Apex Court in SLA(c) Nos.14033-14034/2017 dated 29.01.2020 as well as orders of Hon'ble High Court in WP No.3021/2018 dated 11.10.2018 and to pass IA NO: 2 OF 2023 3 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased to vacate the orders passed in WP No. 3369 of 2023 dated 13-02- 2023 or pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SANTHAPUR SATYANARAYANA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES III 2. GP FOR SERVICES I 3. GP FOR SERVICES II 4. K NARSI REDDY The Court made the following: 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.3369/2023 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:- “to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS a) by declaring that the entire action of the respondents, particularly the entire action of the 1st respondent in not extending the benefit of age of superannuation upto 62 years in terms of orders issued by the Govt., in G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.IV.FR & LR) Dept., dated 31.01.2022 despite of request of the petitioners is as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, improper, contrary to orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.138, dated 08.08.2017 and judgment of Hon’ble Apex court in SLP Nos.14033-14034/2017 dated 05.05.2017 including orders of Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP No.13623/2017, dated 09.08.2017 in the matter of applicability of age of superannuation to the petitioners on par with Government servants b) and further hold that the petitioner herein is entitled for continuation of his services upto the age of 62 years in terms of orders issued by the Govt vide G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.IV-FR & LR) Dept dated 31.01.2022 on account that in earlier, the services of all employees working in corporations/ societies included in the IX and X Schedules of the AP Reorganization Act vide G.O.Ms.No.138 Finance (HR.IV-FR) Dept dated 08.08.2017 extended the benefit of superannuation on par with Govt servants including petitioners and the Honble Apex Court also held that the corporation employees also entitled for such enhancement of age of superannuation on par with Govt servants c) and consequently to direct the respondents to continue the services of the petitioner till up to the age of 62 years with all consequential benefits by extending the same benefit that was extended to the employees in G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.1V-FR & LR) Dept dated 31.01.2022 keeping in view of the earlier orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.138 (Finance (HR.1V-FR) Dept dated 08.08.2017 r/w orders of Honble Apex Court in SLA (c) Nos.14033-14034/2017 dated 29.01.2020 as well as orders of Honble High Court in W.P.No.3021/2018 dated 11.10.2018 and to pass such other order or orders….” 5 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 3. Considering the submissions made by both the learned counsel, on 13.02.2023, this Court was pleased to pass an interim order, which reads as follows: “Therefore, there shall be an interim direction to the respondents to continue the service of the petitioner herein till he attains the age of superannuation of 62 years.” 4. Despite the above said directions, the respondents did not continue the petitioner and relieved the petitioner from service on 30.06.2023 itself. In the said circumstances, the petitioner is entitled for the salary as per the observations of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.381 of 2020 and batch dated 01.04.2021 at paragraph No.44 which reads as follows: “Before parting with the records, we would like to dwell upon another aspect, which cannot be brushed aside. Despite the interim orders passed by this Court allowing the petitioners to continue in service, in gross violation of such interim orders, they have been retired during the subsistence of the interim orders. The action of the University is condemnable and such action is antithesis to rule of law. The appellants have taken law into their own hands and such action is not expected, least of all from an academic institution. This Court cannot remain a mute spectator to such flagrant violation of orders of the Court. In the facts and circumstances of the case, as the petitioners were directed to be continued in service by the interim orders, we direct the appellants to pay salary and emoluments to the writ petitioners from the date when such pay and emoluments were stopped till the date of this judgment within a period of two months from today.” 6 5. The contention of the petitioner is that in identical circumstances, the Division Bench of this Court allowed the appeal and directed salaries to be paid to the petitioner in view of the interim orders granted in favour of the petitioner. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that immediately after the interim orders, the respondents had filed their counter and vacate stay petition stating that the petitioner is a regular NMR employee and he is not entitled for the benefit under G.O.Ms.No.15, dated 31.10.2022 and in fact the regular NMR employees continuation is concerned, the Division Bench has already dismissed the writ petitions. Hence, the petitioner is also not entitled to continue. 7. Considering the above said submissions and on perusal of the orders of this court and also the interim orders, the facts remains that even though this Court has considered and passed the interim orders on 13.02.2023, the respondents did not continue the service of the petitioner after 30.06.2023. In the said circumstances by recording the observations made by the Division Bench in paragraph no.44 in Writ Appeal no.381 of 2020 and batch, the respondents are directed to consider and release the salary of the petitioner from the date of interim order till the date of retirement. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 7 As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J Date:06.04.2026 BSP 8 143 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO:3369/2023 Date:06.04.2026 BSP