Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6467 (AP)

G RAJANNA v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/9930/2025 · 2026-07-15

Nyapathy Vijay

Special Leave Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010195142025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] THURSDAY, THE 16th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 9930/2025 Between: 1. G RAJANNA, S/O LATE CHALAMAIAH AGED 60 YEARS, OCC ASSISTANT ENGINEER R/O 20-511/A, KORLAGUNTA SANJAY GANDHI COLONY, TIRUPATHI CHITTOOR, A.P-517501 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AGRICULTURAL AND COOPERATION DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522503 2. THE A P STATE COOPERATIVE RURAL IRRIGATION CORPORATION LTD, (APSCRIC) (A STATE GOVT. UNDERTAKING) REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 52-1/3- 4/4C, ROAD NO-IB, NTR COLONY, NEAR GOVT GENERAL HOSPITAL VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT-520003 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF COOPERATION AND REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, 2- 16-83, SKY LARK TOWERS, 11TH LANE, SYAMALANAGAR, GUNTUR, GUNTUR 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 tomay be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or 2 direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus (a) declaring the entire action of the respondents, in not extending the benefit of age of superannuation up to 62 years in terms of orders issued by the Govt. In G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.IV- FRand LR) Department dated 31.01.2022 despite of request of the petitioners is as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, improper, contrary to orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.138 dated 08.08.2017 and judgment of Hon ble. Apex Court in S.L.P Nos. 14033-14034 of 2017 dated 05.05.2017 including orders of Hon ble Apex Court in SLP No. 13623/2017, dated 09.08.2017 in the matter of applicability of age of superannuation to the petitioner on par with Government servants. (b) and further hold that the petitioner herein is entitled for continuation of his services up to the age of 62 years in terms of orders issued by the Govt,. Vide G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.IV- FRand LR) Department dated 31.01.2022 on account that in earlier, the services of ail employees working in corporations/societies included in the IX and X Schedules of the AP Reorganization Act, vide G.O.Ms.No.138 Finance (HR.IV-FR) dated 08.08.2017, extended the benefit of superannuation on par with Govt., servants including petitioner and the Hon ble Apex Court also held that, the corporation employees also entitled for such enhancement of age of superannuation on par with Govt., servants. (c) and consequently to direct the respondents to continue the services of the petitioner till up to the age of 62 years with all consequential benefits by extending the same benefit that was extended to the employees in G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.IV- FRand LR) Department dated 31.01.2022 keeping in view of the earlier orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.138 Finance (HR.IV-FR) dated 08.08.2017, r/w orders of Hon ble Apex Court in SI_A(c) Nos. 14033-14034/2017 dated 29.01.2020 as well as orders of Hon ble High Court in WP.No. 3021/20018 dated 11.10.2018 and to pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 may be pleased to direct the respondents to continue the services of the petitioner till up to the age of 62 years with all consequential benefits by extending the same benefit that was extended to the employees in G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.IV- FR&LR) Department dated: 31.01.2022 keeping in view of the earlier orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.138 Finance (HR.IV-FR) dated 08.08.2017, r/w orders of 3 Hon'ble Apex Court in SLA(c) Nos. 14033-14034/2017 dated: 29.01.2020 as well as orders of Hon'ble High Court in WP.No. 3021/2018 dated: 11.10.2018 and to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MADHU SUDHAN P Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.9930 of 2025 ORDER: 1. The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of Respondents in not enhancing the age of superannuation of the Petitioner from 60 years to 62 years, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The Petitioner is working as Assistant Engineer in Respondent- Corporation. While so, the State Government had issued G.O.Ms.No.15, Finance (HR.IV-FR&LR) Department, dated 31.01.2022 enhancing the age of superannuation to the State Government employees from 60 to 62 years. The Petitioner claims for enhancement of his age of superannuation in terms of the said G.O. Hence, the present Writ Petition came to be filed. 3. Heard the counsels. 4. The State Government had recently issued G.O.Ms.No.45, (Finance (HR.IV-FR&LR) Department), dated 02.07.2026 according approval for enhancement of age of superannuation from 60 to 62 years for regular employees of PSUs, Corporations and Societies included under Schedules IX and X of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act-2014 retrospectively with effect from 01-01-2022. 5 5. In view of the implementation of the aforesaid G.O, this Writ Petition is disposed of, with the following directions:- (i) The Respondent-Authorities are directed to continue the Petitioner till he attains an age of 62 years and shall pay the salary as per his entitlement. 6. No order as to costs. 7. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Date: 16.07.2026 chs Whether the order is: Speaking ✔ Reasoned Reportable Non-reportable ✔ 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY 119 WRIT PETITION No.9930 of 2025 Dated:16.07.2026 chs