Disposed

G Adinarayana v. Ap Power Generation Corporation Ltd.

Andhra Pradesh HC11 Jul 2022WP/14295/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226 regarding denial of earned leave encashment, the High Court swiftly disposed of the matter without counter affidavit. Relying on precedents, the Court directed the respondents to dispose of the petitioner's three representations within six weeks, avoiding a merits decision.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to dispose of petitioner's representations within six weeks.

G Adinarayana Vs Ap Power Generation… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.14295 OF 2020

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

¶5

“…..to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.1 in denying the benefit of earned leave encashment as being violative of the leave regulations and Service Regulations of Respondent arbitrary, void, illegal, violative of principles of natural justice Article 14 and Article 300-A of the constitution of India and consequently direct Respondent No.1 to disburse the amount towards the earned leave for 300 days and pass such other orders....”

¶6

No counter affidavit is filed by the respondents till today since 2020 and adjourning the matter for filing counter affidavit, again learned Standing Counsel for the respondents sought time for filing counter affidavit. It appears that the respondents did not choose to file counter affidavit and failed to comply with the Rule 12(1) of the Writ Proceedings Rules, 1977. Following the decision of erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in “J. Ramachandraiah Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others”¹ this Court finds that the respondents violated the Rule 12 of the Writ Proceedings Rules, 1977. Therefore, this Court without expecting counter affidavit by the respondents, decided to dispose of the representations viz., emails dated 19.12.2019, 17.01.2020 and 16.02.2020 only, without touching the merits of the case, I need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition.

¶7

This Court is conscious that no such direction be issued in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in The Government of India

¶8

1 2012 SCC Online AP 730: (2012) 4 ALD 366

¶9

¶10

v. P.Venkatesh² , wherein the Apex Court held that such orders may be passed for a quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened adjudicatory institutions but, they do not serve to the cause of justice. Therefore this Court feels to issue a direction to dispose of the representations viz., emails dated 19.12.2019, 17.01.2020 and 16.02.2020 submitted by the petitioner, I find no other alternative except to issue such direction.

¶11

In the result, Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to dispose of representations viz., emails dated 19.12.2019, 17.01.2020 and 16.02.2020 submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law, within six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶12

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.

¶13

___________________________ DR.K. MANMADHA RAO, J

¶14

Date: 11.07.2022

¶15

¶16