APHC010349822017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 32220/2017 Between: 1. B. MALLESWARA RAO, S/O LATE SAVARAYYA, AGED: 65 YEARS, OCC: RETIRED EMPLOYEE. R/O DOOR NO.2-2/9-36, SANAVEEDHI, SRIKAKULAM TOWN, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, RTC HOUSE, PANDIT NEHRU BUS STATION. VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT AT VIZIANAGARAM. 3. THE DEPOT MANAGER, APSRTC, PALAKONDA DEPOT, PALAKONDA, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction on the part of Respondents 2 and 3 on the petitioner's representation submitted by way of Legal Notice dated 17.07.2017 to pay' the leave salary of Rs. 33,000/- along with interest pursuant to dismissal of E.P No. 34 of 2011 in O.S No. 22 of 2008 on 12.06.2012. E.P.No.I79 of 2012 in O.S No. 141 of 2011 on 09.07.2013 and F.P. No. 12 of 2013 in O.S No. 24 of 2010 on 21.07.2014 by the Hon'ble Courts as illegal, irregular, irrational, contrary to the settled principles of service jurisprudence and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India 2 and consequently direct the respondents to pay the leave salary amount of Rs. 33,000/-along with interest in favour of the petitioner and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SRINIVAS AMBATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. K SRINIVASA PRASAD SC For APSRTC The court made the following ORDER: The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed seeking the following main prayer:- “……to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction on the part of Respondents 2 and 3 on the petitioner's representation submitted by way of Legal Notice dated 17.07.2017 to pay' the leave salary of Rs. 33,000/- along with interest pursuant to dismissal of E.P No. 34 of 2011 in O.S No. 22 of 2008 on 12.06.2012. E.P.No.I79 of 2012 in O.S No. 141 of 2011 on 09.07.2013 and F.P. No. 12 of 2013 in O.S No. 24 of 2010 on 21.07.2014 by the Hon'ble Courts as illegal, irregular, irrational, contrary to the settled principles of service jurisprudence and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay the leave salary amount of Rs. 33,000/-along with interest in favour of the petitioner and pass.…….” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents Corporation. Perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to the averments made in the writ affidavit submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as cleaner on 19.01.1980 in the respondents Corporation. He submits that during the course of his employment, the third parties filed civil suits against the petitioner seeking recovery of money against the petitioner, which were 3 decreed and all the subsequent E.Ps were dismissed, except E.P. No.86 of 2011 in O.S.No.602 of 2008 on the file of Prl. Junior Civil Judge, Srikakulam, for Rs.33,0000/- as an attachment against the petitioner. He submits that the 3rd respondent, who is the Depot Manager withhold an amount of Rs,.66,000/- of the leave salary amount instead of Rs.33,000/-, which was ordered in an attachment and subsequently, the petitioner retired from the service on 30.04.2014 as Mechanic. He submits that the petitioner, after knowing about the said action by the respondents in withholding the excess amount instead of attached amount the competent civil court, preferred a representation by way of legal notice dated 17.07.2017, addressing his grievance and all the relevant details to respondent Nos.2 and 3 and the same was not redressed till now. 4. Making the said submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a direction was given by this Court on 03.10.2017, to dispose of the said legal notice/representation dated 17.07.2017 submitted by the petitioner to the 3rd respondent. He further prays to make interim order dated 03.10.2017 absolute. 5. In response to the submissions, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents Corporation has no objection to dispose of the legal notice dated 17.07.2017. However, he submits that due to a mistaken impression and bifurcation of APSRTC as well as State of A.P., the respondents Corporation could not comply with the interim direction dated 03.10.20217 of the Court. He further states that if any fresh representation is preferred again by the 4 petitioner along with all the relevant details, the same would be considered by the respondents Corporation, in accordance with Law. 6. Admittedly, this Court on 03.10.2017 passed the following interim orders:- “Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. There shall be interim direction to the respondents 2 and 3 to dispose of the representation dated 17.07.2017 submitted by the petitioner in accordance with Law. Notice.” 7. Taking into consideration the above said submissions made by both the counsel and in order to put quietus to the lis, this Court, instead of further probing into the matter, deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition in the following terms:- i. The petitioner shall make a fresh representation along with copy of legal notice/representation dated 17.07.2017 and all the relevant documents to substantiate his case before the 2nd respondent, within a period of four weeks, from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. ii. On making such representation, the 2nd respondent shall dispose of the same within a period of four weeks and communicate the same to the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 19.12.2025 GVK 5 67 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.32220 of 2017 Date: 19.12.2025 GVK