APHC010352492025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) QMS TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY CA' WRIT PETITION NO: 18158 OF 2025 Between: Thotaraju Rajashekar, S/o. Late Ramulu Aged about 81 years, Occ: Retired as Divisional Electrical Engineer (Electrical) R/o.Flat No.6, Occeana Apartment Pedavaltair, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Special Chief Secretary Energy Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi Guntur District. 2. The Eastern Power Distribution Company of AP Ltd, (APEPDCL), Corporate Office, rep.by its Chairman and Managing Director Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh 3. The Director (HRD and Finance), APEPDCL, Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam District, AP 4. The Chief General Manager (HRD), APEPDCL, Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam District, AP 5. The Senior Accounts Officer (Funds and Pensions), Corporate Office, APEPDCL, Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam District, Andhra Pradesh. ...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 an appropriate writ. Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring^ the action of the respondents 2 to 5 in not sanctioning and releasing all retiral benefits such as gratuity, earned leave encashment and other attendant benefits including fixation of full pension which were withheld due to pendency of Criminal case in C.C.No. 185/2018 in spite of clear acquittal in the said case vide judgment dt.31-10-2023 and in spite of the representations dt.28-11-2023, 29-01-2024, 09-05-2025 and 20-06-2025 as highly illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law besides unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 5 to extend notional promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer w.e.f. 04-09-2002 in accordance with petitioner's seniority and eligibility with all consequential service benefits including fixation of pay, revision of pension, protection of seniority and release retiral benefits accordingly. 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 to direct the Respondent No.2 to consider the representations dt.09-05-2025 and 20- 06-2025 for payment of all retiral benefits, payable to the petitioner forthwith pending disposal of the main Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI YASWANTH GADE Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: GP FOR SERVICES I Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 to 5: SRI V V SATISH SC FOR APEPDCL The Court made the following order: APHC010352492025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVfTl (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] TUESDAY.THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 18158/2025 Between: 1.THOTARAJU RAJASHEKAR, S/O.LATE RAMULU AGED . ABOUT 81 YEARS, OCC.RETIRED AS DIVISIONAL ELECTRICAL ENGINEER (ELECTRICI) R/O.FLAT N0.6, OCCEANA VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH PEDAVALTAIR APARTMENT VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY, ENERGY DEPARTMENT, BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, SECRETARIAT AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF AP LTD, (APEPDCL), REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR VISAKHAPATNAM, ANDHRA PRADESH CORPORATE OFFICE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, 3.THE DIRECTOR HRD AND FINANCE, APEPDCL, VISAKHAPATNAM VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, AP 2 4.THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER HRD, APEPDCL, VISAKHAPATNAM VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, AP 5.THE SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER FUNDS AND APEPDCL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, PENSIONS, CORPORATE OFFICE, VISAKHAPATNAM ANDHRA PRADESH. ...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 an appropriate writ. Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 5 in not sanctioning and releasing all retiral benefits such as gratuity, earned leave encashment and other attendant benefits including fixation of full pension which were withheld due to pendency of Criminal case in C.C.No. 185/2018 in spite of clear acquittal in the said case vide judgment dt.31-10-2023 and in spite of the representations dt.28-11-2023, 29-01-2024, 09-05-2025 and 20- 06-2025 as highly illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law besides unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 5 to extend notional promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer w.e.f. 04-09-2002 in accordance with petitioner's seniority and eligibility with all consequential service benefits including fixation of pay, revision of pension, protection of seniority and release retiral benefits accordingly forthwith and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2025 praying that in the Petition under Section 151 CPC circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the Respondent No.2 to consider the representations dt.09-05-2025 and 20- 06-2025 for payment of all retiral benefits, payable to the petitioner forthwith pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass 3 Counsel for the Petitioner; 1.YASWANTH GADE Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P.No.18158 of 2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed questioning the action of the Respondents in not sanctioning and releasing all retiral benefits such as gratuity, earned leave encashment and other attendant benefits apart from fixation of full pension as arbitrary and illegal. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as 2. follows: The Petitioner was appointed as Junior Engineer in the year 1972 in APSEB and subsequently, promoted as Assistant Divisional Engineer in the year 1989. Thereafter, he was further promoted as Divisional Engineer in the year 1988 and retired as such on 30.06.2003. While so, ACB officials raided the house of the Petitioner in the year 1996 and registered a case in Crime N0.3/BC/RJY-96 under Section 13 (2) r/w Section 13(1) (e) of the Prevention of Corruption of Act, 1988 and the same was numbered as C.C.No.185 of 2018 on the file of the Special Judge for Trial of SPE and ACB cases, Rajamahendravaram. While the Petitioner was working in Kakinada as Divisional Engineer, he placed under suspension vide Memo dated 02.01.2001 until was 2 conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings. After full fledged trial, the Petitioner was acquitted vide judgment dated 31.10.2023 and the operative portion of the judgment reads as under; As per the information submitted above, it is clear that value of the total assets possessed by the Accused Officer is less than the likely savings of the Accused Officer and his wife. Hence, there are no disproportionate of assets on the part of the accused officer. Accordingly I hold that the prosecution has failed to prove that the accused officer has possessed assets disproportionate made to his known of income during the check period i.e. 24.10.1972 to source 26.03.1996. 3. Though the Petitioner was acquitted for the charges levelled against him in C.C.No.185 of 2018, the retirement benefits due to him were not settled. Hence, the present writ petition is filed. Learned counsel for the Petitioner Sri G.Yaswanth, would submit that in view of acquittal in the criminal case, there is no bar 4. for the Respondent-authorities to release the pension benefits Learned counsel further contends that retirement benefits are statutory and fundamental- right of the The Petitioner, being a senior due to the Petitioner. Petitioner to lead a dignified life. ■ .S'- 3 citizen and aged about 81 years, cannot be made to run around the Court for the rightful retirement benefits. Learned Government Pleader for Services-I would submit that the case of the Petitioner is being considered by the Respondent-authorities and necessary steps will be taken in that regard. Learned Government Pleader further submits that the representations of the Petitioner were rejected on account of pendency of the criminal case. 5. 6. Having heard the respective counsel, this Court is of the opinion that as there has been clean acquittal of the Petitioner in the criminal case, there is no right for the Respondent-authorities to withhold retirement benefits. The action of the Respondent- authorities in spite of being put on notice about the acquittal of the criminal case is unsustainable. 7. The writ petition is therefore allowed with following directions; (i) Respondent-authorities shall finalize the retirement benefits due to the Petitioner including gratuity, earned leave encashment and other attendant benefits apart from fixing the full pension 4 Within a perioci of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and amount quantified shall be disbursed within a further (ii) The period of four (4) weeks thereafter. made clear that any delay in the disbursal will be viewed (iii) It is act of contempt by the concerned authoirty. as an (iv) No order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions if any shall stand dismissed. Sd/- A.VIJAYA BABU assistant registrar //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Energy Department, State of Andhra Amaravathi, Guntur 1. The Special Chief Secretary, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Pradesh, District. 2. The Chairman and Managing Director, Eastern Power Distribution (APEPDCL), Corporate Office, Visakhapatnam, District, Andhra Pradesh (HRD and Finance), APEPDCL, Visakhapatnam Company of AP Ltd Visakhapatnam Director 3. The Visakhapatnam District, AP Chief General Manager (HRD), APEPDCL, Visakhapatnam 4. The Visakhapatnam District, AP Accounts Officer Funds and Pensions, Corporate Office, District, Andhra Pradesh. 5. The Senior APEPDCL, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam 6. One CC to Sri. Yaswanth Gade Advocate [OPUC] V V Satish SC for APEPDCL [OPUC] High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 7. One CC to Sri. Two CCS to GP for Services I 8. 9. Two CD Copies gsc HIGH COURT DATED:22/07/2025 ORDER WP NO. 18158 OF 2025 ^ 2 0 AUG 2025 SectjonxC^ ALLOWING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS