Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 14192 (AP)

Dr B JESSIE v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/399/2026 · 2026-03-31

D Ramesh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010003322026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] WEDNESDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 399/2026 Between: 1. DR B JESSIE, D/O.ANANDA RAO B, AGED 61 YEARS, OCC ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION, SRI KRISHNADEVARAYA UNIVERSITY (SKU), R/O. B32, SKU CAMPUS, ITIKALAPALLI, SRI VENKATESWARA PURAM, ANANTAPUR, ANDHRA PRADESH- 515003. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. 2. SRI KRISHNADEVARAYA UNIVERSITY, ANANTAPUR, REP. BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR ANANTAPUR, DISTRICT. 3. 3. THE REGISTRAR, SRI KRISHNADEVARAYA UNIVERSITY, ANANTAPU DISTRICT. 4. 4. THE FINANCE OFFICER, (I/C). FINANCE ACCOUNTS SECTION, SKU, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 5. 5. THE MEDICAL OFFICER, SKU HEALTH CENTRE, SKU, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 6. THE PRINCIPAL, SKU COLLEGE OF ARTS SCIENCES, SKU, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 7. 7. THE DIRECTOR, DOE, SKU, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 8. 8. THE HEAD, SKIE, SKU, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 9. 9. PA TO VICE CHANCELLOR RECTOR REGISTRAR, SKU, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): The Court made the following ORDER: 1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to issue an appropriate writ/ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the Memo No. SKU/N.T.Estt/E3/Retirement/2025 dated 15.12.2025 issued by Respondent No. 3 directing the respondents No. 4 and 9 to settle the sanctioned advances and other dues, if any, for finalization of retirement benefits and fixation of pension of individuals who are required to retire from university services, including me, in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.lO, Higher Education Department, dated 14.02.2024, EC Resolution No. 187-3490 (3.2.11) dated 02.03.2024, and the Vice- Chancellors Order dated 12.12.2025 relating to Age of Superannuation - Prior Intimation - Non-Teaching Establishment, S.K. University, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to G.O.Ms.No.39, and violative of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and consequently set aside the Memo No.SKU/N.T.Estt/E3/Retirement/2025 dated 15.12.2025 issued by Respondent No.3 and further direct Respondent No. 3 to continue the Petitioners in service till she attains the age of 65 years in accordance with G.O.Ms. No. 39 dated 29.07.2023 with all consequential benefits and pass…” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Director of Physical Education in the 2nd respondent University in the year 2006 and has been continuing in the said post since then. However, the 3rd respondent issued the impugned proceedings dated 15.12.2025 treating the petitioner as part of the non-teaching establishment and thereby denied him the benefit of the relevant Government Orders, which is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the applicable statutory provisions. 4. A similar issue relating to the very same University came up for consideration before a Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.7973 of 2020, by order dated 09.02.2026, in Sri G. Gangadharaiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others, wherein this Court observed as follows:- 12. As per the statute of the University, the teachers of the University shall comprise Professors, Associate Professors. Assistant Professors, and such others who may be classified as Teachers of the University from time to time It further provides that the following categories shall also be treated as equivalent positions of Teachers of the University as per UGC guidelines: Librarian, Deputy Librarian, Assistant Librarian, Director of Physical Education, Deputy Director of Physical Education, Assistant Director of Physical Education. 13. As noted from the UGC's proceedings dated 17.04.2009, Information Scientist has been equated to the Post of Assistant Librarian for grant of revised scales of pay as well as the Career Advancement Scheme as notified by Ministry vide their letter dated 31 12.2008 Provisions of statute of the University read with UGC's proceedings dated 17.04.2009, the Information Scientists are to be treated as Assistant Librarians, consequently they are teachers of the University and they should be considered as teaching personnel of the University. 14. Having regard to the above, I am of the view that the judgment of me Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos. 381, 382, 411, 426 of 2020, 30, 35 and 46 of 2021, dated 01 04 2021, is distinguishable on facts. 15. While issuing notice before admission, this Court granted the following interim directions in the case: "Notice before admission. For filing counter, post after vacation. In the meanwhile, the petitioner may be permitted to discharge his duties, however, Salary shall not be paid In the event of petitioner succeeds the petition, he is entitled to claim his Salary and other benefits since the matter is proposed to be placed before Executive Council of the University as directed in the last para of G.O.Ms. No 59, dated 24.12.2014 In case, the Executive Council takes any decision to extend the age of Superannuation to the petitioner, the respondent shall pay the Salary from the date of proposed retirement." The University by its resolution rejected the request of the petitioner to extend the age of superannuation. During the pendency of the above Writ Petition, the petitioner has attained the age of superannuation 62 years. 16. In view of the foregoing by placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of P.S.Ramamohana Rao Vs. A.P.Agricultural University and Another, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to retire at the age of 62 years, in terms of G.O.Ms. No.59, Higher Education (UE) Department, dated 24.12 2014. 17. In view of the foregoing, the writ petition is disposed of, observing that the petitioner was entitled to continue in service till he attains the age of 62 years. The respondents are therefore directed to pay the applicable salary with all consequential benefits to the petitioner for the subject period of two (2) years i.e., with effect from June, 2020 to May, 2022. There shall be no order as to costs. 5. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents vehemently contended that, as per G.O.Ms.No.39 dated 29.07.2023, the post held by the petitioner does not fall within the category eligible for the said benefit and therefore the petitioner is not entitled to the benefits extended therein. 6. Having considered the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the order passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in the above referred judgment, this Court is of the view that the issue is already covered by the said decision. The Co-ordinate Bench of this court in W.P.No.7973 of 2020 dated 09.02.2026 has categorically held that the posts of Librarian, Deputy Librarian, Assistant Librarian, Director of Physical Education, Deputy Director of Physical Education, and Assistant Director of Physical Education are equivalent to teaching positions and the incumbents holding such posts are entitled to continue in service until they attain the age of 62 years. Since the issue has already been decided by the coordinate Bench of this Court and the petitioner herein stands on the same footing, the petitioner is also entitled to the same benefit. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned proceedings dated 15.12.2025 in so far as the petitioner is concerned, with a consequential direction to the respondents to continue the petitioner in service until he attains the age of 65 years, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.39 dated 29.07.2023. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE D RAMESH 01.04.2026 klk 145 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 399/2026 01.04.2026 klk