APHC010717692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 586/2026 Between: 1. MUVVALA BHARATHI, W/O LATE SURYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/O DEVADI COLONY, DEVADI VILLAGE, NARASANNAPETA, MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT-532421 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT SOCIETY FOR TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT PROMOTION (DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH SERVICES), SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI-522238. 2. ANDHRA PRADESH SOCIETY FOR TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT PROMOTION APSTEP, REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, OFFICE AT. FMWC PLUS M4J, CANARA BANK RD, PATAMATA, AUTO NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH-520007. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND CHAIRMAN, SELF EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING, SRIKAKULAM(SETSRI), SRIKAKULAM- 532001. 4. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SETSRI, SRIKAKULAM-532001. ...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 issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the Respondents in settling the lawful retiral benefit dues of the Petitioner's deceased husband, Late Muvvala Suryanarayana, who retired as Watchman in 4th Respondent on 30.06.2010, by computing the eligible service from the initial appointment 2 VS,J W.P.No.586 of 2026 dated 30.04.1988 pursuant to the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.18404 of 2013 as well as proposals forwarded by the 4th Respondent in Lr.No.3/Establishment/SETSRI/2010, Dt.10.02.2020, Lr.No.03/SETSRI/2010, Dt.19.02.2020 and Letter No.3/Establishment/SETSRI/2010 dated 26.10.2020 to the 2nd Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unreasonable and contrary to Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution of India and also contrary to the A.P. STEP Service Rules, 1992, and consequently direct the Respondents to forthwith release and disburse forthwith all retirement benefits of the Petitioner's late husband namely Muvvala Suryanarayana, retired as Watchman in the 4th Respondent including gratuity, leave encashment, and any other admissible benefits with interest at 12percent per annum from the date of retirement till realization and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 to forthwith release and disburse forthwith all retirement benefits of the Petitioner’s late husband namely Muvvala Suryanarayana, retired as Watchman in the 4^*^ Respondent including gratuity, leave encashment, and any other admissible benefits with interest at 12% per annum from the date of retirement till realization and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P RAJKUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.586 of 2026 ORDER: The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “….to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the Respondents in settling the lawful retiral benefit dues of the Petitioner's deceased husband, Late Muvvala Suryanarayana, who retired as Watchman in 4th Respondent on 30.06.2010, by computing the eligible service from the initial appointment dated 30.04.1988 pursuant to the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.18404 of 2013 as well as proposals forwarded by the 4th Respondent in Lr.No.3/Establishment/SETSRI/2010, Dt.10.02.2020, Lr.No.03/SETSRI/2010, Dt.19.02.2020 and Letter No.3/Establishment/SETSRI/2010 dated 26.10.2020 to the 2nd Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unreasonable and contrary to Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution of India and also contrary to the A.P. STEP Service Rules, 1992, and consequently direct the Respondents to forthwith release and disburse forthwith all retirement benefits of the Petitioner's late husband namely Muvvala Suryanarayana, retired as Watchman in the 4th Respondent including gratuity, leave encashment, and any other admissible benefits with interest at 12 percent per annum from the date of retirement till realization and pass….” 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: a) The petitioner herein is the wife of Late Muvvala Suryanarayana, who served as Watchman under the 4th Respondent. The petitioner's late husband was initially appointed as Night Watchman on 30.04.1988 by the 4th respondent and retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2010. Though the 4th respondent recognized his date of retirement as 30.06.2010 in the retirement notice dated 03.02.2010, the retirement benefits were not settled for the reasons best known to the respondents. 4 VS,J W.P.No.586 of 2026 b) During his life time, the petitioner's husband approached this Court by filing W.P.No.18404 of 2013 challenging the proceedings dated 20.09.2010 issued by the 3rd respondent, whereby his date of retirement was treated as 30.06.2008, and also questioning the inaction of the respondents in settling his retirement benefits by reckoning his date of retirement as 30.06.2010. The said writ petition was disposed of on 03.09.2019 directing the respondents to calculate the retirement benefits by reckoning the age of superannuation as 60 years, i.e., 30.06.2010, instead of 58 years, i.e., 30.06.2008, and to release the same within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. c) Unfortunately, the petitioner’s husband died on 31.05.2019 due to old age ailments. Thereafter, the petitioner made several representations to the 4th respondent seeking release of the retirement benefits payable to her deceased husband. Pursuant thereto, the 4th respondent addressed letters dated 10.02.2020, 19.02.2020 and 26.10.2020 to the 2nd respondent requesting implementation of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.18404 of 2013 and sanction and release of the retirement benefits payable to the deceased employee. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that, despite the proposals submitted by the 4th respondent, the matter is still pending before the 2nd respondent and no orders have been passed till date. 4. The 3rd respondent filed a detailed counter affidavit reiterating the facts as stated by the petitioner. However, it is specifically stated that, pursuant to 5 VS,J W.P.No.586 of 2026 the order dated 03.09.2019 passed by this Court in W.P.No.18404 of 2013, the 4th respondent recalculated the retirement benefits by reckoning the age of superannuation as 60 years and determined the balance amount payable. Thereafter, proposals for sanction and release of the said amount were forwarded to the Managing Director, APSTEP, Vijayawada, vide letters dated 10.02.2020, 19.02.2020 and 26.10.2020 and the matter is pending consideration before the competent authority for sanction and release of funds. 5. Learned Government Pleader for Services-I has furnished a copy of instructions of the 2nd respondent vide Letter No.22/APSTEP/ADMN/2026, dated 05.05.2026, wherein it is stated that the delay in settlement of retirement benefits is not willful, but occurred due to non-submission of necessary documents such as the death certificate, family member certificate, bank particulars and legal heir certificate of the deceased employee. 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Government Pleader for Services-I. 7. On perusal of the counter-affidavit, it can be seen that the 4th respondent, after recalculating the retirement benefits by reckoning the age of superannuation as 60 years in compliance with the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.18404 of 2013, has already sent proposals to the 2nd respondent on 10.02.2020, 19.02.2020 and 26.10.2020 for sanction and release of the retirement benefits. However, the same are still pending for consideration before the 2nd respondent. In such circumstances, the question 6 VS,J W.P.No.586 of 2026 of delay in settlement of retirement benefits on the ground of non-submission of documents, i.e., death certificate, family member certificate, bank particulars and legal heir certificate does not arise. 8. Further, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, pursuant to a telephonic communication received from the respondent authorities, the petitioner has already submitted the required documents before the 2nd respondent on 06.05.2026. 9. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the proposals submitted by the 4th respondent vide letters dated 10.02.2020, 19.02.2020 and 26.10.2020 and sanction and release the retirements benefits payable to the petitioner, duly taking into consideration the documents submitted by her on 06.05.2026, in accordance with law and in compliance with the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.18404 of 2013, dated 03.09.2019, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 07.05.2026 KGR