Bathina Venkata Satyanarayana, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
WP/16520/2026 · 2026-06-24
Nyapathy Vijay
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 4089 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 4089 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : 25-06-2026 Date of uploading : APHC010306952026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] THURSDAY, THE 25th DAY OF JUNE 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 16520/2026 Between: Bathina Venkata Satyanarayana, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. BADDIGAM V GOPALREDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following:
2
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P.No.16520 of 2026 O R D E R: The Writ Petition is filed for a direction to the Respondent Authorities to strictly comply with the Order dated 20.06.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.13069 of 2006 and disburse the revised pay fixation arrears to the Petitioners.
2. The Petitioners had retired from service of the Respondent No.2 Corporation after rendering service. While in service, the Petitioners filed M.P.No.37 of 2005 under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1942 before the Labour Court-1 for a direction to declare that the Petitioners are eligible for revised pay scale 1978 @ Rs.325-500 on par with similarly placed persons. The Labour Court, Hyderabad, vide
Order dated 02.05.2006, allowed the M.P.No.37 of 2005 and held that the Petitioners are entitled for the relief sought by the Petitioners. Thereafter, the Corporation challenged the same before the then High Court of A.P at Hyderabad vide W.P.No.13069 of 2006 and the same was dismissed after due consideration on 20.06.2023. However, the benefit granted by the Labour Court was not extended to the Petitioners. Hence, the present Writ Petition.
3. Sri Santhi Chandra, learned Standing Counsel for APIIC passed on the Written Instructions, dated 19.06.2026, wherein it is mentioned that the claim of the Petitioners is under active consideration by the Corporation and necessary action will be taken in accordance with law.
4. Considering the fact that the claim of the Petitioners is crystallized vide Orders dated 20.06.2023 of the then High Court in
3
W.P.No.13069 of 2026, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions: i) The Respondents shall finalise the revised pay due to the Petitioners and disburse the same to the Petitioners with arrears within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this
Order. ii) There shall be no order as costs. The Written Instructions dated 19.06.2026 are placed on record. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 25.06.2026
Whether the order is: Speaking
Reasoned
Reportable
Non-reportable
eha
4
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
W.P.No.16520 of 2026 Dated: 25.06.2026
eha