APHC010267812025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ATAMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) r pc^L^ TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 15752 OF 207*; Between: Payyavula Kanni Subrahmanyam, S/o. Late P. Nadipi Kannaiah, Aged 62 years, Occ- Technician (Retired) Department of Education, SVU College of Arts, Tirupati. R/o. D.No. 6-32/2, M.R.Palli, SKD Nagar, Tirupathi, Tirupati District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi Mandal, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Special Chief Secretary Finance (HR.IV-FR and LR) Department, Velagapudi, Thullur Mandal, Amaravati, Guntur District. 3. The Executive Council, Sri Venkateswara University Chairman-cum- Vice-Chancellor, SV University, Tirupati. 4. Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati, Chittoor District, Registrar. 5. The District Audit Officer, S.V. University, State Audit, Tirupati. Thullur Secretariat Buildings, Represented by its Represented by its ...Respondents 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 to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 4th Respondent in not finalizing the Petitioners pension and pensionary benefits after retirement of attaining the age of superannuation of 62 years and insisting to return his salaries for a period of 2 years i.e., from 01-02-2023 to 31-01-2025 for an amount of Rs. 10,48,437/- and Rs. 10,48,437/- and Rs. 14,25,840/- in the name of Audit Objections for granting pension and pensionary benefits by ignoring that the Petitioner continued his service up to the age of 62 years by virtue of interim orders of this Hon’ble Court as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Art 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently declare that Respondent University cannot ask to return the Petitioners salary for a period of 2 years of his service in the name of Audit Objections \A NO: 1 OF 207.*; 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 to direct the 4th Respondent University to fix and finalize the and other Pensionary benefits forthwith without insisting 2 years of his service in the name of Audit- Objections Petitioner’s pension to return his salary of Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAMBABU KOPPINEEDI Counsel for the Respondents No.1 and 2: GP FOR SERVICES II Counsel for the Respondents No.3 to 5: SRI BUTTA VIJAYA BHASKAR, Standing Counsel The Court made the following order: APHC010267812025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) r ir-I [3506] TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 15752/2n9»; Between: 1.PAYYAVULA KANNI SUBRAHMANYAM,, S/O. LATE P. NADI PI KANNAIAH, AGED 62 YEARS, OCC- TECHNICIAN (RETIRED) DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, SVU COLLEGE OF ARTS, TIRUPATI. R/0. D.NO. 6-32/2, M.R.PALLI, SKD NAGAR, TIRUPATHI TIRUPATI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, THULLUR MANDAL, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY FINANCE (HR.IV-FR AND LR) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, THULLUR MANDAL, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3.THE EXECUTIVE COUNCiL, SRI VENKATESWARA UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN-CUM- VICE-CHANCELLOR, SV UNIVERSITY, TIRUPATI. 4. SRI VENKATESWARA UNIVERSITY, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 5.THE DISTRICT AUDIT OFFICER, S.V UNIVERSITY, STATE AUDIT, TIRUPATI. ’ . ’ ...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 tomay be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 4th Respondent in not finalizing the Petitioners pension and pensionary benefits after retirement of attaining the age of superannuation of 62 years and insisting to return his salaries for a period of 2 years i.e., from 01-02-2023 to 31-01-2025 for an amount of Rs. 10,48,437/- and Rs. 14,25,840/- in the name of Audit Objections for granting pension and pensionary benefits by ignoring that the Petitioner continued his service upto the age of 62 years by virtue of interim orders of this Honble Court as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Art 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of Indiaand consequently declare that Respondent University cannot ask to return the Petitioners salary for a period of 2 years of his service in the name of Audit Objections and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 may be pleased to direct the 4th Respondent University to fix and finalize the Petitioner’s pension and other Pensionary benefits forthwith without insisting to return his salary of 2 years of his service in the name of Audit- Objections and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.RAMBABU KOPPINEEDI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GPFOR SERVICES I 2.GPFOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION No.15752 of 2025 ORDER: Present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking following prayer: “to declare the action of the 4*^ Respondent in not finalizing the Petitioner’s pension and pensionary benefits after retirement of attaining the age of superannuation of 62 years and insisting to return his salaries for a period of 2 years i.e., from 01-02-2023 to 31-01-2025 for an amount of Rs. 10,48,437/- and Rs.14,25,840/- in the name of Audit Objections for granting pension and pensionary benefits by ignoring that the Petitioner continued his service upto the age of 62 years by virtue of interim orders of this Hon’ble Court as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Art 14, 16 and 21-of the Constitution of India and consequently declare that Respondent University cannot ask to return the Petitioners salary for a period of 2 years of his service in the name of Audit Objections and pass such other orders.” 2. Heard Sri Rambabu Koppineedi, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services - II appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri Butta Vijaya Bhaskar, learned standing counsel, appearing for respondents 3 to 5. 2 CGR, J W.P. No. 15752 of 2025 <? Petitioner has worked as Technician, a non-teaching post, in 4“^ respondent University. He was sought to be superannuated on attaining age of 60 years. Petitioner filed W.P. No. 1709 of 2023 and by way of interim order dated 25.01.2023, this Court permitted petitioner to continue in service till next date of hearing. Later, petitioner has been continued in service till he attained the age of 62 years and was superannuated on 31.01.2025. Petitioner was paid salary during said period. Now, grievance of petitioner is that he is not being settled the pension and other retiremental benefits considering age of superannuation as 62 years and on the other hand, the salary paid for two years i.e., from 01.02.2023 to 31.01.2025 is sought to be recovered. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that this Court dealt 4. with more or less similar case in W.P. No.1374 of 2025, wherein respondents therein were directed to settle the retiremental beneifts of the petitioners therein upon considering age of superannuation as 60 years, though they continued in service till 62 years on account of interim orders passed in writ petitions which are pending adjudication and would urge to extend the same benefit to the petitioner herein. CGR, J W.P. No. 15752 of 2025 5. Sri Butta Vijaya Bhaskar, learned standing counsel, appearing for respondents 3 to 5, on the other hand, submits that petitioner was continued beyond 60 years on account of interim orders passed by this Court and with respect to other co-employees interim orders were passed, the matters carried in appeal before Division Bench, where interim orders came to be vacated. Therefore, they were not continued beyond 60 years, therefore, petitioner cannot claim either salary for the period post 60 years or pensionary benefits treating his service upto 62 years. were 6. Perused the record and considered rival submissions. It is not in dispute that petitioner initially was protected by interim orders for continuing beyond 60 years, though interim orders were not extended, petitioner has been continued to be in 7. service till attaining the age of 62 years and that he discharged duties for the respondent University. So having extracted work from the petitioner, it is not justifiable for respondents to propose recovery of salary at this stage and that too when the substantive writ petition is still pending consideration and so far as payment of pension and other retiremental benefits are concerned, this Court 4 CGR, J W.R No.15752 of 2025 W.p. No. 1374 of 2025 has already considered similar aspect in wherein Paragraph No.7 of the said order reads thus; “7. Since petitioners have already retired from service after attaining the age of 62 years, though the issue as to whether superannuation be 60 years or 62 years is pending other batch of writ I retirement benefits considering the retirement age as 60 years withheld and retained. As respondent adjudication before this Court in petitions, petitioners age of superannuation cannot be University is canvassing the age of retirement as 60 years, directed to process the claim of the petitioners for or they are their retirement of benefits considering the age and make payments superannuation as 60 years accordingly. These payments made shall, however, be subject to outcome in Writ Petition Nos.31714, 32532 & 35490 of 2022; 9770 of 2023 and 1374 of 2025 and batch. where the age of superannuation from 60 years to 62 years is being adjudicated and in case petitioners succeed, they shall be entitled to be paid retirement benefits considering the age of superannuation in accordance with the aforesaid judgment.” In view of the following the earlier directions issued in aforesaid writ petition and directed to process the pension and other of retirement as 60 years above, this writ petition is disposed of 8. the respondents are retiremental benefits treating the age and release the payment which however shall be subject to 5 CGR, J W.R No. 15752 of 2025 outcome of the result in W.R No. 1709 of 2023 and in case, the petitioner succeeds in the said writ petition, the respondents shall reassess the pension and retirement pensions accordingly and further, the respondents are directed not to recover or adjust the salary paid to the petitioner for the service rendered beyond 60 years and till date of his superannuation. Accordingly, with the above direction, this writ petition is • 9. disposed of. No costs. interlocutory applications pending As a sequel. consideration, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- SHAIK MOHD. RAFi ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, ^ Secretary,; Higher Education Department Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Thullur Mandal, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Special Chief Secretary Finance (HR.IV-FR . Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Thullur Mandal District. % and LR) Department, J, Amaravati, Guntur 4. The Registrar, Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati 5. The District Audit Officer, S.V. , Chittoor District, University, State Audit, Tirupati. Advocate [OPUC] wo CCs to GP FOR SERVICES II High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] One CC to SRI BUTTA VIJAYA BHASKAR, Standing Counsel [OPUC] 9- Two CD Copies 6. One CC to SRI RAMBABU KOPPINEEDI gsg / HIGH COURT ( m DATED: 01/07/2025 ORDER IT WP NO. 15752 OF 2025 s 0 ^ AUG 2025 rentSectijfl^ Co DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS