APHC010210362024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 10533/2024 Between: 1. B JAGADEESH, S/O KONAYYA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC TECHNICAL WORK INSPECTOR, PRI SUB- DIVISION, GUDURU R/O KOTA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE ENGINEERINCHIEF, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, PANCHYAT RAJ CIRCLE, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PRI DIVISION, GUDUR, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the proceedings Rc.No.EC2/Retirement Notification /2013 dated 12-4-2024 issued by the 3rd respondent directing the petitioner to retire from service at the age of 60 years on 30- 4-2024 as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of A.P Public Employment ( Regularization of Age of Superannuation) Act 1984, discriminatory and in violation of Article 14 of Constitution of India and Consequently direct the respondents 3 and 4 to continue the petitioner till he attains the of 62 years, and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 pleased to direct the respondents 3 and 4 to continue the petitioner as Technical Work Inspector till he completes the age of 62 years by suspending the proceedings Rc.No.EC2/Retirement Notification /2013 dated 12- 4-2024 issued by the 3rd respondent , pending disposal of the above Writ petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P GANGA RAMI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES IV The Court made the following: 3 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P.No.10533 of 2024 O R DE R: The Present writ petition is filed declaring the proceedings Rc.No.EC2/Recruitment Notification/2013 dated 12.04.2024 issued by Respondent No.3 directing the Petitioner to retire from service at the age of 60 years i.e. on 30.06.2024 as illegal, arbitrary. 2. The Petitioner was initially appointed as NMR on 01.10.1985 in Panchayat Raj Department and subsequently his services were regularized as per G.O.Ms.212, Finance & Planning (P.C.III) Department, dated 22.04.1994 and as Respondent Nos.3 and 4 allowed the Petitioner to work as Techinical Work Inspector as he is possessing the qualification of ITI, he is working as such. The pay of the Petitioner was fixed as per the revised pay scales. 3. While so, Respondent No.4 issued letter vide R.C.No.B2/work charged/2021 dated 27.03.2024 to the 3rd Respondent stating that Petitioner is attaining the age of 60 years by 30.06.2024 and requested to issue notice to the Petitioner retiring him from service on 30.06.2024. Pursuant to the said letter, 3rd Respondent issued proceedings 4 Rc.No.EC2/Retirement Notification/2013 dated 12.04.2024, informing to the Petitioner regarding the same. 4. In the counter affidavit filed by Respondent No.4, it is stated that Petitioner did not join in the regularised post of Attender and is continuing in service as NMR and claiming salary under the Head of NMR only. As per G.O.Rt.No.1225, P.R. & R.D.(ESTT-II- A) Department, dated 22.08.2009, Government has accorded sanction for payment of minimum time scale of pay without HRA and other allowances stating that granting of minimum time scale of pay to the NMRs shall not confer any right for regularization. 5. Heard learned counsel for both the parties. 6. As the Petitioner is not regularised, he cannot claim parity with persons in regular Government employment. Therefore, no case is made out for the Petitioner and accordingly writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions if any shall stand dismissed. ___________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 17.12.2025 KLP