h IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMAR (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 1374 OF 2025 Between: 1. Bhimireddy Narasa Reddy, S/o Veera Reddy, Aged 63 years, Occ Retired Deputy Registrar, Acharya Nagarjuna University, R/o Nambur Post, Pedakakani Mandal, Guntur District. 2. Madala Seetha Ramaiah, S/d Venkateswara Rao, Aged 63 years, Occ Retired Assistant Registrar, Acharya Nagarjuna University, Ibrahimpatnam, Vijayawada, N.T.R. District. 3. Ch. Nagarjuna, S/o Ch Gnana Sundara Rao, Aged 63 years, Occ Retired Senior Assistant, Acharya Nagarjuna University, R/o Kaza Village, Mangalagiri Mandal Gdntur District 522 503. 4. Ch. Sambaiah, S/o Yesu, Aged 63 years, Occ Retd. Senior Assistant, Acharya Nagarjuna University, R/o Door no.7-146, VTPS Road, Swarna Apartments, Ibrahimpatnam, N T R District. 5. Ch. Brahma Reddy, S/o. Hanuma Reddy, Aged about 63 years, Occ Retired Wireman, Acharya Nagarjuna University, R/o D. No. 1-146/1, Venkata Reddy Palem, Kaza Post, Mangalagiri Mandal, Guntur District Pin code 522503. R/o 6. K. Brahma Reddy, S/o Venkata Reddy, Aged 63 years, Occ Retired R/o Nambur Village, Cleaner, Acharya Nagarjuna University, Pedakakani Mandal, Guntur District. 7. Mudraboyina Yellamanda Rao, S/o. Chinna Kotaiah Aged 63 years, Occ Retired Attender, Acharya Nagarjuna University, R/o Vijaya Bhaskar Nagar, Nambur, Pedakakani post, Guntur District. 8. L. Satyanarayana, S/o. L. Venkateswara Rao, Aged 63 years, Occ Retired Head Cook, Acharya Nagarjuna University, R/o Door Pedakakani, Guntur District, Pin code 522509. 9. R. Suresh Babu, S/o Venkata Ramaiah, Aged 63 Assistant Engineer, Acharya Nagarjuna University, Ramarao Nagar, Near S V N Colony, Guntur, Guntur District. 10. Subramanyam, S/o Ramaiah, Aged 63 years, Occ Retired Watchman Acharya Nagarjuna University, R/o Kothapeta Vadduruvari Sanakkayalapet Road, Guntur, Guntur District, Pin code 522001. 11. Mandapati Annamary, W/o Late Namburu Yobu, who expired while in as Deputy Registrar,^Acharya Nagarjuna University, aged years, R/o Vijaya Bhaskar Nagar, Nambur Village, Pedakakani Guntur District 522 508. No 6-3/2 years, Occ Retired R/o Taraka veedhi service 54 Mandal, (Writ Petition to the extent of 9*'’ “ WITHDRAWN Petitioner is Dismissed per Court order dt.18.03.2025 vide lA No.2/2025 in WP No.1374/2025 in the petition & Affidavit) as as ...PETITIONERS AND 1. The Slate of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its. Principal Secretary to Government, Higher Education Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its. Special Chief Secretary to Government, Department of Finance (HR.IV-FR and LR), Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretarfi, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 3. Acharya Nagarjuna University; Rep. by its Registrar Nagarjuna University, Nagarjuna Nagar, Guntur District Acharya 522 510. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue a writ or writs of order or orders in the nature of Writ of Mandamus may one more particularly to declare the action of the O'"* / Fa Respondent in wrongfully withholding the sanctioning of pension and retirement benefits consequent to the retirement of the Petitioners attaining the superannuation age, even after the expiry of 6 months from the date of superannuation without any valid grounds either in the form of pending departmental proceedings or judicial proceedings amounting to culpable delay as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and Executive Instructions IV under Rule 45 of the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules, 1980 issued vide G.O.Ms.No.100, Pension-1) Department, dated 27/6/2018, issued by the 2 Rule 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules statutory rights of the Petitioners under the Andhra Pradesh Pension Rules, 1980 and consequently to declare that the Petitioners entitled for benefit of pension and other retirement benefits interest on delayed payment as per the rules and also to declare that Petitioners, who have continued to work on the basis of the interim orders passed by this Court are entitled for the benefit of service and the payment of salary during the said period. on i contrary to the Finance (HR.III. Respondent, 1980 and also the Revised nd are along with lA NO: 1 OF 202.4 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 3'’'^ Respondeht to settle the pension and retirement benefits of the Petitioners. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI UMA MAHESWARA RAO DASARI Counsel for the Respondent No.1t GP FOR SERVICES-III Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR SERVICES -I Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI M.CHALAPATHI, SC FOR ACHARYA NAGARJUNA UNIVERSITY The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010023282025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE [3506] PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 1374/2025 Between: Bhimireddy Narasa Reddy and Others AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...PETITIONER(S) ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S); 1. UMA MAHESWARA RAO DASARI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES III 2.GPFOR SERVICES I 3.M.CHALAPATHI SC For Nagarjuna University The Court made the following: ORDER: The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief; “to issue a writ or writs or order or orders, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the 3^'* respondent in wrongfully withholding the sanctioning of pension and retirement benefits consequent to the retirement of the petitioners on attaining the superannuation age even after the expiry of 6 months from the date of superannuation without any valid grounds either in the form of pending departmental proceedings or judicial proceedings amounting to culpable delay, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and contrary to the Executive Instructions IV under Rule 45 of the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules, 1980, issued vide G.O. Ms. No.lOO Finance (HR ill Pensioni) Department, dated 27 06.2018, issued by the 2"'^ respondent. Rule 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules, 1980, and also the statutory rights of the Petitioners under the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules, 1980, and consequently to declare that the Petitioners are entitled for benefit of pension and other retirement benefits along with interest on delayed payment as per 2 CGR, J. W.P.No.1374 of 2025 the rules and also to declare that Petitioners who have continued to work on the basis of the interim orders passed by this Court are entitled for the benefit of service and the payment of salary during the said period and be pleased to pass...” Petitioners were appointed in various cadres in 3"'^ respondent 2. University and later retired from service. The age of superannuation initially was fixed as 60 years, later, the 3^^ respondent by proceedings. dated 01.02.2022, is said to have adopted G.O.Ms.No.15, dated 31.01.2022, issued by the 2"^^ respondent enhancing the age of superannuation from 60 years to 62 years. As petitioners have completed 60 years between May, 2024 and August, 2024, they were continued in service though crossed 60 years, however, when 3”^^ respondent later sought to withdraw the previous proceedings, dated 01.02.2022 and superannuated, the petitioners and similarly situated non-teaching staff, who completed 60 years as on 31.01.2022, approached this Court, in particular, petitioners filed W.P.No.31714 of 2022, in which, this Court passed interim order, dated 28.09.2022 allowing the petitioners to continue till they attain the age of 62 years. The said writ petition is pending consideration. Now, petitioners have attained superannuation on completion of 62 years. Petitioners have requested respondent No.3 to finalise their retirement benefits including the pension, gratuity, encashment of leave etc., but, however, the same are not settled so far. V 3 CGR, J. W.P.No.1374 of 2025 Heard Sri Dasari Lima Maheswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners; learned Assistant Government Pleaders for Services-I and II and Sri M.Chalapathi, learned Standing Counsel for 3'^^ respondent University, for the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since petitioners have completed the age of superannuation of 62 years, though the issue of superannuation of non-teaching staff whether be 60 or 62 years is subject matter in other batch of writ petitions, petitioners retirement benefits cannot be retained on the said pretext and even by confining the age of superannuation as 60 years, which the 3^^ respondent University intends to apply, petitioners should be settled with the retirement benefits. 3. 4. M.Chalapathi, learned Standing Counsel for the 3'"* respondent University, placed on record written instructions, dated 15.03.2025, relevant part of the said instructions read as follows: 5. Sri The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O,Ms.No.15 31.01.2022 for Finance (HR.IV-FR&LR) Department, dated enhancement of age of superannuation from 60 years to 62 years. The Respondent University has continued the petitioner. But, the Government of A.P. has clarified that the above should applicable only to the State Government employees not to the others vide Cir. Memo.No.1813129/FIN01-HR/212/2022/HR-IV, dated 23.09.2022. The Respondent University has ordered to relieve those who have completed 60 years of age. The petitioner and other 12 Non-Teaching staff have filed W.P.No.31714 of 2022 before Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The Hon’ble High Court of A.P. has passed interim orders to continue the Petitioners till the age of 62 years. 4 CGR, J. W.P.No.1374of2025 The Government of AP has issued G.O.Ms.No.10 Higher Education (UE) Department, dated 14.02.2024 for enhancement of age of superannuation of age from 60 years to 62 years to the Non- Teaching staff of Universities with prospective effect only i.e., 14.02.2024. Accordingly, the respondent University has relieved them from service. The Petitioner and others approached Hon’ble High Court and filed W.P.No.5318 of 2024. The Hon’ble High Court has passed orders to continue the writ petitioners herein in terms of the interim orders passed in Writ Petition Nos.31714, 32532 & 35490 of 2022 and 9770 of 2023. Accordingly, the respondent University has continued the petitioners and paid all the salaries even during their gap period also. The petitioner was relieved from the service on 31.07.2024 at the age of 62 years. Now, the petitioner and others are requesting to settle their pension and their retirement benefits. Among some of them are approached Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No.1374 of 2025 to settle their retirement benefits. All the above writ petitions are pending before Hon’ble High Court of A.P., in the above issue. Unless to decide the 2 years service of them, it is difficult to pay their retirement benefits. Meanwhile the respondent University can process the provisional pension subject to the outcome of final orders of the Hon’ble High Court of A.P.. in Writ Petition Nos.31714. 32532 & 35490 of 2022 and 9770 of 2023 and 1374 of 2025.” (emphasis by this Court) Learned Standing Counsel for 3''^ respondent University based on aforesaid written instructions submits that the controversy as to age of 6. superannuation is pending consideration in a batch of writ petitions before this Court, therefore, petitioners claim for retirement benefits cannot be considered treating the age of superannuation as 62 years. however, they are willing to process the retirement benefits considering the age of superannuation as 60 years. 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 adjudication before this Court in other 5 CGR, J. W.P.No.1374 of 2025 batch of writ petitions, petitioners’ retirement benefits considering the age of superannuation or retirement age as 60 years cannot be withheld and retained. As respondent University is canvassing the age of retirement as 60 years, they are directed to process the claim of the petitioners for their retirement benefits considering the age of superannuation as 60 years and make payments 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. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of in so far as petitioners 1 to 8, 10 and 11. The writ petition to the extent of 9‘^ petitioner is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs. 8. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ! SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary to Government, Higher Education Department State of Andhra Pradesh, Government of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amar^vati. 2. The Special Chief Secretary to Government, Department of Finance (HR.IV-FR and LR), State of Andhra Pradesh, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 3. The Registrar, Acharya Nagarjuna University, Acharya Nagarjuna University, Nagarjuna Nagar, Guntur District 522 510. 4. One CC to Sri Uma Maheswara Rao Dasari, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri M. Chalapathi, SC for Acharya Nagarjuna University[OPUC] 6. Two CCs to 7. Two 8. Three CD Copies. r. GP for Services-lll, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] CCs to GP for ServiceS'I, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] ssb HIGH COURT DATED; 18/03/2025 ORDER * 0 K APR 2025 WP.No.1374 of 2025 % pi s^. Current Section . DISPOSING OF THE W.P. AGAINST PETITIONER Nos.1 to 8,10 & 11 and DISMISSING THE W.P. AGAINST PETITIONER No.9 WITHOUT COSTS