Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 15204 (AP)

S.Lakshmikantha Reddy v. The Union of India

WP/9926/2025 · 2025-04-21

Kiranmayee Mandava

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010193142025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] MONDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 9926/2025 Between: S.lakshmikantha Reddy and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The Union Of India and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. PASAPALA SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I 2. The Court made the following: ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services – I and Sri Venkata Rama Rao Kota, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos.3, 5 to 8. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is against the 2nd respondent in not considering the request of the petitioners permitting them to switch over to the benefits of General Provident Fund (in short, ‘GPF’). 2 3. The contention of the petitioners is that the petitioners were appointed as Village Electricity Worker on contract basis on 25.03.1998 in the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh Electricity Board. Thereafter, the petitioners were converted to Contract Junior Lineman/Junior Assistant/Sub Engineer 12.06.2000, 27.06.2002 respectively. Subsequently, they were absorbed as Junior Lineman in pay scale of Rs.3,965/- to Rs.6,365/- with effect from 30.09.2004. The petitioners contend that since, they were appointed in 1998, the benefits of the AP State Electricity Board General Provident Fund particularly Regulation-5(1)(ii), the employees are eligible to become subscribers to GPF including temporary and permanent employees after completion of one year continuous service. Though, the petitioners are employees of the respondent Corporation/Board, the 2nd respondent did not provide the option to switch over to GPF scheme. Thus, prays for a direction to take a decision pursuant to the regulations framed under Section 79 (c) and (k) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 and Lr.No.CMD/CGM(HRD)/GM (HRII) DGM (pension) / PO (pension)/JPO/D.No.401/24, dated 18.07.2024. It is further urged that this Court has passed an order in another Writ Petition in W.P.No.30476 of 2024 and batch, dated 20.01.2025, directing the respondents to take a decision pursuant to the said proceedings, dated 18.07.2024 regarding the extension of benefits of GPF to the petitioners. 3. Having regard to the contentions advanced and having regard to the decision of this Court referred supra, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to take appropriate decision in pursuance of Lr.No. 3 CMD/CGM(HRD)/GM(HRII)DGM(pension)/PO(pension)/JPO/D.No.401/24, dated 18.07.2024, regarding the extension of pensionary scheme benefit i.e., GPF to the petitioners, as per the Rules, as expeditiously as possible, not later than three (03) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, in respect of the petitioners herein . There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 21.04.2025 MSI 4 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 9926/2025 Date: 21.04.2025 MSI