1 APHC010629362018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 30168/2018 Between: Smt. A. Krishnaveni, ...PETITIONER AND Sri Venkateswara University and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. BUTTA VIJAYA BHASKAR ( SC FOR SRI VENKATESWARA UNIVERSITY 2. GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…to issue a writ order or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 1st respondent i.e., Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati represented by its Registrar, in not giving 2 posting orders to the petitioner in pursuance of her representation dated 07.10.2015 and consequently giving her all other benefits consequent to her retirement on 02.03.2018 as Record Assistant in the establishment of Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati as bad, illegal, arbitrary and pass such other order or orders…” 2. Heard Sri M.Vidyasagar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Higher Education, appearing for the 2nd respondent and Sri Butta Vijaya Bhaskar, learned Standing counsel for the 1st respondent-University. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has joined in the University on 01.04.2011.But due to her severe health issues, she could not attend the duty from 02.04.2011. Learned Counsel would further submit that she has submitted a representation dated 07.10.2015 requesting the authorities for her reposting orders. Learned Counsel would further submit that they have not passed any order till this day on the representation made by the petitioner. Thereafter, she is retired from service on 02.03.2018. This petition is preferred seeking a direction to the respondent-authorities to settle all her benefits on her retirement dated 02.03.2018 as Record Assistant in the establishment of Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati. Questioning the inaction of the respondent-University in not giving any posting orders to her in pursuance of her representation, the present petition is preferred. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for University would submit that except joining on 01.04.2011, she did not turn up to attend the duty. Learned 3 Standing Counsel would further submit that the petitioner has submitted a representation on 07.10.2015 to the office and since then, she did not turn up and not available to the office to take any course of action against her representation. Ultimately, she is deemed to have retired on 02.03.2018 on reaching the superannuation. Learned Standing Counsel would further submit that after her retirement, the present petition is filed and the Court may pass appropriate orders directing the petitioner to make a fresh representation, so that the University may take appropriate steps to settle her retirement benefits. 5. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the material placed on record, the fact remains that the petitioner except submitting her joining report on 01.04.2011, did not turn up to the office to give her any posting. It is also not in dispute that she has made representation on 07.10.2015 to the office and later she is not available to the office to take further course of action against her representation. Ultimately, she deemed to have been retired from service on attaining superannuation in the month of March, 2018. Be that as it may, the only relief sought in the present petition is to settle her retiral benefits as per her eligibility and entitlement. 6. In that view, it is apposite to dispose of the present petition giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the office and submit necessary documents to the office to enable the respondent authorities to process the issue and settle her amounts, if any due as per her entitlement. On submitting such 4 documents, the respondent authorities are directed to process the same forthwith and settle her amounts, if any due from the office. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ Dr. VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date:10.04.2025 UPS/ARR 5 22 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.30168 of 2018 Dated.10.04.2025 UPS/ARR