Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4776 (AP)

K. Hanumanth Naik v. Yogi Vemana University ,

WP/1982/2018 · 2025-06-18

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

h IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMAR (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 1982 OF ?ni« Between: 1. K. Hanumanth Naik, S/o Bikya Naik, Aged 31 years, Academic Consultant/Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Applications, Data Base Management Systems, Yogi Vemana University College, Kadapa Kadapa District, Andhra Prades. ( Writ Petition is Dismissed as WITHDRAWN in so far as Petitioner No.1 is concerned as per C.O. dt 24.12.2021 in WP No.1982 of 2018) 2. Smt. V. Munneamma, W/o R. Khaja, Aged 31 years. Academic Consultant/Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Applications Dot.Net Yogi Vemana University College, Kadapa Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh 3. Smt. S. Siva Jyothi, W/o L. Veeeranjaneya, Aged 36 years. Academic Consultant/Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Applications Data Analysis Algorithmic, Yogi Vemana University College Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh Kadapa 4. Smt. G. Amrutha Vani, W/o K. Lakshmi Narasimha Academic Consultant/Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Applications Data Structures Yogi Vemana University College. Kadapa Kadapa District, Andhra Pradesh Agd 30 years. ...PETITIONER(S) AND M 1. Yogi Vemana University , Kadapa, Dr. YSR Kadapa District, represented by its Registrar 2. State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District 3. State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Finance Department, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District ...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, order or direction, more in the nature of writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, declaring the action of the respondents, not extending the benefit of minimum scale to the petitioners in the cadre of Academic Consultant/Assistant Professors on par with other regular Assistant Professors as arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory and unconstitutional, malafdie violating Article 14 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and issue consequential directions, directing the 1 respondent to pay the minimum time scale of pay to the petitioners attached to the post of Assistant Professors on par with regular Assistant Professors working in the 1st respondent university, as per the law laid down by Honorable Supreme Court in case of State of Punjab and others Vs Jagjit Singh and others reported in 2016 INDLAW SC 738, reiterated in WPMP No. 47740/2016 in WP No. 38751/2016 Dated 04.12.2017 and WPMP No. 5882/2017 in WP No.4833/2017 Dated 15.02.2017. lA NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may 1 ba pleased pleased to forthwith direct the 1st respondent to extend minimum time scale of pay to the petitioners Assistant law laid down by Honorable Supreme Court i the Professors, as per the case of State of Punjab and in others Vs Jagjit Singh and others reiterated in WPMP No. 47740/2016 reported in 2016 INDLAW SC 738, in WP No. 38751/2016 Dated 04.12 2017 and WPMP No. 5882/2017 in WP No.4833/2017 Dated 15.02.2017 disposal of the writ petition. pending Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI S V INDIRA Counsel for the Respondent No.1; SRI TENEPALLI UNIVERWSITY)) Counsel for the Respondent No.2:GP FOR HIGHER Counsel for the Respondent No.3: GP FOR FINANCE The Court made the following: ORDER NIRANJAN (SC FOR Y V EDUCATION r' is APHC010037482018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 1982/2018 Between: K. Hanumanth Naik and Others ...PETITIO,NER(S) AND Yogi Vemana University and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.SV INDIRA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1 .TENEPALLI NIRANJAN (SC FOR Y V UNIVERWSITY)) 2.GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING (AP) 3.GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION (AP) The Court made the following: ...RESPONDENT(S) 2 HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 1982 of 2018 ORDER: The instant Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioners seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: to issue a writ order or direction more in the nature of writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India declaring the action of the respondents not extending the benefit of minimum scale to the petitioners in the cadre of Academic Consultant/Assistant Professors on par with other regular Assistant Professors as arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory and unconstitutional, malafdie violating Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and issue consequential directions directing the 1^‘ respondent to pay the minimum time scale of pay to the petitioners attached to the post of Assistant Professors on par with regular Assistant Professors working in the 1"‘ respondent university as per the law laid down by Honourable Supreme Court in case of state of Punjab and others Vs Jagjit Singh and others reported in 2016 INDLAW' SC 738 reiterated in WPMP No.47740/2016 in WP No.38751/2016 Dated 04.12.2017 and WPMP No.5882/2017 in WP No.4833/2017 Dated 15.02.2017 " 2. The earlier Docket Proceedings would show that none represented for the Petitioners and the matter was directed to be listed today under the-caption "For Dismissal". 3. Despite the matter being listed under the caption "For dismissal", none represented for the Petitioners today. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1-University and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I are in attendance. 5. In that, view, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/-B.PRASADA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. OneCCto SRI. S V INDIRA Advocate [OPUC] * 2. One CC to SRI. TENEPALLI NIRANJAN (SC FOR Y V UNIVERWSITY)) Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCS GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION, High Court of Andhra at Amaravati [OUT] 4. Two CCs GP FOR FINANCE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 5. Three CD Copies Pradesh at Amaravati nm HIGH COURT DATED: 19/06/2025 ORDER WP.No.1982 of 2018 ^01 AUG 2025 DISMISSING THE WP FOR NON-PROSECUTION WITHOUT COSTS