Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 25536 (AP)

Chavali Padmavathi v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh

WP/3153/2014 · 2026-01-30

Harinath N

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 HN, J W.P.No.3153_2014 APHC010567792014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] SATURDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 3153/2014 Between: 1. CHAVALI PADMAVATHI,, D/O. CH.VENKATA CHALAPATHI RAO, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC: MANAGER, GROUP OF TEMPLES, RYALI VILLAGE, ATREYAPURAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, TILAK ROAD, HYDERABAD. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, ' ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI 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 toto issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not extending the benefit of time scale notionally from the date of appointment i.e., on 01-04-1984 instead of 01-09-1989 as per the recommendation of the 3rd 2 HN, J W.P.No.3153_2014 respondent to the 2nd respondent is illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently, direct the respondnet No.2 to extend the benefit of time scale notionally from the date of appointment i.e., on 01-04- 1984 instead of 01-09-1989, and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP 3872 OF 2014 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 to direct the respondnet No.2 to extend the benefit of time scale notionally from the date of appointment i.e., on 01-04-1984 instead of 01-09-1989, pending disposal of the above writ petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS 3 HN, J W.P.No.3153_2014 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 3153 of 2014 ORDER: 1. It is submitted that the petitioner has already been granted promotion by the competent authority. Subsequent to the issuance of the said promotion, the petitioner has also attained the age of superannuation and has accordingly retired from service. 2. It is further submitted that all consequential and admissible service and retiral benefits arising out of her service, including those consequent upon the promotion, have been duly released in her favour. In support of the said submissions, the relevant proceedings are placed on record. 3. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the same the present writ petition stands closed. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date:31.01.2026 NKA 4 HN, J W.P.No.3153_2014 86 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 3153 of 2014 Date: 31.01.2026 NKA