APHC010540402025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] MONDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 28973/2025 Between: P.L.N. Rao @ Prathipati Lakshmi Narasimha Rao, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. C B ADARSH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.28973 of 2025 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of Respondents in rejecting the Petitioner’s claim for annual increment due on 01.08.2018 for computing pensionary and retirement benefits as illegal and arbitrary and contrary to A.P.S.R.T.C. Employees (Pay & Allowances) Regulations, 1964. 2. The Petitioner had retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.07.2018 as Assistant Depot Clerk (ADC), Chilakaluripeta Depot. The next annual increment due to the Petitioner was on 01.08.2018. As the said increment was not granted to the Petitioner, the Petitioner filed W.P.No.15233 of 2019 before this Court and the same was disposed of directing the Respondents therein to consider the representation of the Petitioner. Consequent thereto, the impugned Order was passed on the ground that the Petitioner had retired from service on 31.07.2018 on attaining the age of superannuation and as the next annual increment fell for consideration on 01.08.2018, by which date the Petitioner was 3 not in service, the Petitioner is not entitled to the said benefit. Hence, the present Writ Petition. 3. This issue was considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Director (ADMN & HR) KPTCL and others v C.P. Mundinamani and Others1 and held that the individuals who retired on 31.07.2018 would be entitled to the next annual increment i.e., on 01.08.2018. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, while passing the Judgment, had taken into consideration the divergent views of various High Courts including the Full Bench Judgment of this Court in Principal Accountant-General, Andhra Pradesh and Another v. C. Subba Rao2. 4. In view of the above, the impugned order in rejecting the Petitioner’s claim for annual increment due on 01.08.2018 cannot be sustained and the Writ Petition is allowed with the following directions: i) The impugned Proceedings No.I.1/876(37)/2019- RM(G), dated 17.08.2020, are hereby set aside. 1 2023 AIR (SC) 1956 2 2005 (2) LLN 592 4 ii) The Respondent Authorities are directed to grant the annual increment due on 01.08.2018 to the Petitioner for computing pensionary and retirement benefits. iii) There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Date : 27.10.2025 eha 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No. 28973 of 2025 Date : 27.10.2025 eha