• .i IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HON’BLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 28788 OF 2021 Between: G. Raju, S/o Nagaiah, aged 50 yrs, Working as Office Subordinate O/o. Joint Director of Agriculture, Kurnool, Kurnool District ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of AP, Represented by Its Principal Secretary, I and CAD Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amavaravati, Guntur District. 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by Its Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amavaravati, Guntur District. 3. The Engineer-in-Chief, Water Resource Department, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada Krishna District- 4. The Superintending Engineer, SRBC Circle-I, Nandyal, Kurnool District 5. The Executive Engineer, SRBC, Division No.1 Nandyal, Kurnool District 6. The District Collector, Kurnool, Kurnool District ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondents in not granting retrospective regularization from the date of completion of 5 0 years on or before 25.11.1993 for counting of NMR Service rendered prior to regularization of petitioners service for the purpose of pension and fjensionary benefits is illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principles of /j" natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to grant retrospective regularization from the date of completion of 5 years on or before 25.11.1993 for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits. lA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for retrospective regularization from the date of completion of 5 years on or before 25.11.1993 for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits in terms of orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 6318 of 2015 dt.17.08.2015 which were followed by the combined Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No. 33936/2011 & batch dt.02.05.2018 Reported in 2018(4) ALT P6, pending disposal of the writ petition in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI POTHUBANDI CHAITANYA SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1,3, 4 & 5: GP FOR SERVICES III Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 & 6: GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010478102021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3310] THURSDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 28788/2021 Between: ...PETITIONER G. Raju AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Ap and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.POTHUBANDI CHAITANYA SRI NIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GPFOR SERVICES III 2.GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following Order: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief: “ to issue a writ, order or direction more particuiarly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to deciare the inaction of respondents in not granting retrospective reguiarization from the date of completion of 5 years on or before 25.11.1993 for counting of NMR Service rendered prior to reguiarization of petitioners service for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits \ 2 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to grant retrospective regularization from the date of completion of 5 years on or before 25.11.1993 for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits ” Heard Mr.P.Chaitanya Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner and 2. learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I, for the respondents. On hearing, it is conjointly submitted by the learned counsel for the 3. petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the common order of this Court in Writ Petition No.6389 of 2020 and batch, dated 18.09.2024. In view of the submissions made by both the petitioner’s counsel and 4. learned Assistant Government Pleader, this Writ Petition is disposed of, in terms of the above said Common Order in Writ Petition No.6389 of 2020 and batch, dated 18.09.2024. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand 5. closed. Registry is directed to attach a copy of the Common Order in Writ 6. Petition No.6389 of 2020 and batch, dated 18.09.2024, to this Order. Sd/- U.SRI DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTER OFFICER //TRUE COPY// SE To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Irrigation and CAD Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amavaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amavaravati, Guntur District. 3. The Engineer-in-Chief, Water Resource Department, Currency Nagar, Vijayawada Krishna District. 4. The Superintending Engineer, SRBC Circle-1, Nandyal, Kurnool District 5. The Executive Engineer, SRBC, Division No.1 Nandyal, Kurnool District 6. The District Collector, Kurnool, Kurnool District 7. One CC to Sri Pothubandi Chaitanya Srinivas, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Services III, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 9. Two CCs to GP for Services I, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 10. Three CD Copies (Along with a copy of order dt. 18.09.2024 in WP No.6389 of 2020 and batch) TF HIGH COURT DATED:30/01/2025 ORDER I' 15 FEB 2025 §1 ^ . Current Section . WP.No.28788 of 2021 DISPOSING OF THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS 1 APHC010103762020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3310] WEDNESDAY .THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NOs: 6389, 7077, 7118. 7133, 7205, 7335, 8100 of 2020 Between: ...PETITIONER B.masthan Reddy AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Ap and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.P RAGHAVENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.D.KASIM SAHEB(SC FOR MUNICIPALITIES SERVICE- 22188/AP/823/2002 2.K SREEDHARA MURTHY (SC for Municipalities and Municipal Corporation services) 3. GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN URBAN DEV The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER:- Since the facts and issue involved in all the Writ Petitions, I find it expedient to decide these matters by a Common Order. For the sake of convenience, W.P.No.6389 of 2020 is taken as leading case. f 2 2. The case of the petitioner in W.P.No.6389 of 2020 in short is that petitioner was initially appointed as NMR on 1.2.1987 in the 4**^ respondent corporation. Subsequently proposals were sent to the Government by the 3 rd respondent vide Roc.No.11358/2010/M3, dt. 12.08.2010 for regularization of the eligible NMRS working in Tadepalli Municipality including petitioner and petitioner name is shown at SI.No.2 in the proposals. Thereafter, the Government issued GORT. No.1495, MA & UD Dept., dt.28.12.2010 regularizing petitioner services as Bill Collector and consequential orders were issued by the 3rd respondent vide Roc. No. 11358/2010/M3 dt.11.1.2011. As such, petitioner services were regularized with prospective with affect i.e, from the date of proceedings, though petitioner is entitled for regularization services from the date of completion of 5 years of service. Meanwhile the petitioner has been transferred from Tadepalli Municipality to Piduguralla Municipality and subsequently from Piduguralla Municipality to Mangalagiri Municipality, Guntur district. While the petitioner is working in Mangalagiri Municipality, he was retired from services on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2019. Accordingly the petitioner has submitted a representation dt.31.07.2019 for his retirement benefits, but the officials informed that petitioner is not entitled for any retirement benefits including pension since petitioner service was regularized in the year 2011 and as such petitioner will not get any retirement benefits. The petitioner further submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil No.6318/2015 held that the individuals are entitled for regularization of their services from the date of completion of 5 years of service, but the said benefit 3 is not being extended to the petitioner on the sole ground that he has not obtained orders from the Hon'ble High Court. It is stated that recently the combined Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in a Batch of WPs i.e WP No.33936/2011 & Batch dt.2.5.2018 held that all the petitioners therein entitled for retrospective regularization for counting the NMR services form 25.11.1993 for the purpose of pensionary benefits without any monetary relief. The petitioner further submits that, he requested the authorities for similar relief for which they said that "unless and until you obtains from the court orders for retrospective regularization you cannot get such benefit." It is further submitted by the petitioner that in similar circumstances, the are Government issued GORt.No.664 MA & U D Dept., dt.10.7.2018 granting relief of retrospective regularization in the case of employees working in Tirupathi Municipal Corporation. The Government also issued another G.O.Ms. NO.8, Water Resources Department dt.10.02.2020 extending the similar benefit to the employees working in irrigation department. Now petitioner is also seeking similar relief for the said benefit, hence the present writ petitions came to be filed. 3. Heard Sri.P.Raghavendra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration Urban Development and Sri.K.Sreedhara Murthy, learned Standing Counsel for Municipalities and Municipal Corporation Services for the respondents. 4. On hearing learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contents urged in the writ petitions and placed on record the decision of the Hon’ble i 4 Division Bench of the composite High Court at Hyderabad reported in Government of A.P rep., by its Principal Secretary, PR and RD Department, Hyderabad and Others v. N. Venkaiah and Others”\ wherein ct it was held as follows:- “53. On the above analysis, the writ petitions are disposed of directing the authorities concerned to extend the benefit of B. Srinivasulu (1 supra) to the employees in this batch of cases by reckoning their services from the date of completion of five years in service, on or before 25.11.1993, for the purpose of their pension and pensionary benefits. They shall however not be entitled to actual monetary benefits for the said period, in the form of arrears of pay or allowances. ” 5. So also, the Division Bench of this Court following the decision of N. Venkaiah’s case (cited supra) in “A.P.Bevarages Corporation Limited, Vijayawada, Krishna District v. K. Kesava Narayana Reddy and Others”^, wherein it was held as follows:- “15. Following the Division Bench judgment in N. Venkataiah’s ^case (supra), we hold that the services of respondent Nos. 1 to 60/ writ petitioners would be deemed to have been regularized from the cut-off date, i.e 25.11.1993, for the purpose of fixation of pension and pensionary benefits. As held in the aforesaid judgment, respondent Nos.1 to 60/ writ petitioners are not to be given any monetary benefits in the form of arrears of pay or otherwise from that date. Respondent Nos. 1 to 60/ writ petitioners will be entitled to salary in terms of G.O.Ms.No.31, dated 28.02.2017. 6. And also, the Division Bench of this Court also followed the decision of N. Venkataiah’s case cited supra in “The State of Andhra Pradesh rep.. ^2018(4) ALT6{D.B) ^2021(5) ALD 422 (AP) (DB) ^ 2018(4) AID 590 (DB) 5 9^ by its Principal Secretary, Agriculture & Corporation (Sericulture) Department v. T.S.Gopalaiah"^, wherein it was held as follows;- “12. We are of the considered opinion that ends of justice will be sub-served in the present case by moulding the relief by providing that though the writ petitioners would be deemed to have been regularized from the cut-off dated i.e 25.11.1993 for the purpose of fixation of pension and pensionary benefits, pension will be made available to them only from the date of filing of the writ petition i.e from 19.02.2020. 7. Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleaders for the respondents vehemently opposed to allow the writ petitions. 8. Perused the record. 9. No doubt, the issue involved in these writ petitions are squarely covered by an order of this Court as cited supra, where under this Court passed several orders by following the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court and also the Government issued G.Os by granting retrospective regularization for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits for the service rendered prior to regularization of their services. 10. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that, in similar circumstances, the Government issued G.O.Rt.No.664, dated 10.07.2018 granting relief of retrospective regularization in the case of employees working in Tirupati Municipal Corporation. The Government also issued another G.O.Ms.No.8, Water Resources Department, dated 10.02.2020 extending the similar benefit to the employees working in irrigation '' W.A.No.483, 2021, dated 05.08.2021 p 6 department and that the petitioner in this writ petitions also seeking similar relief for the said benefit. 11. Therefore, keeping in view of the ratio laid down by this Court in the decisions cited supra, the respondents are directed to regularize the services of the petitioners with effect from the date of their completing five (5) continuous service, on or before 25.11.1993 retrospectively, for the purposes of their pension and pensionary benefits, within three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that they shall however not be entitled to actual monetary benefits for the said period, in the form of arrears of pay or allowances. years 12. With the above direction, all the writ petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed. DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO Date: 18.09.2024 RSD