Disposed

Abdul Khuddus v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Sept 2022WP/20028/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging forced retirement, the Court directed the respondent authorities to dispose of a pending internal representation within four days, while declining to decide the merits of the allegations in the petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 16.06.2022 within four days.

Abdul Khuddus Vs The State of Andhra… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.20028 OF 2022

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the

¶5

Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

¶6

“…..to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing the proceedings No.E1/36/2008-P, dated 29.06.2022 whereby where under petitioner was forced to retire from service on the afternoon of 30.06.2022 on attaining the superannuation age of 60 years as highly illegal, arbitrary and violation of Principles of natural justice and contrary to G.O.Ms.No.15, dated 31.01.2022 and boards decision on 19.05.2022 and also violation of article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to set aside the vide proceedings No.E1/36/2008-P dated 30.06.2022 by directing the respondents to continue the petitioners service in the Andhra Pradesh State Waqf Board w.e.f 30.06.2022 AN and to continue the petitioner till attaining the age of 62 years and pass such other orders....”

¶7

Though the petitioner made several allegations against the respondents, during the course of hearing learned counsel for the petitioner requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 16.06.2022 submitted by the petitioner, without touching the merits of the case.

¶8

Learned counsel for the Government Pleader for Services-III

¶9

readily agreed to dispose of the representation dated 16.06.2022

¶10

¶11

submitted by the petitioner, if any pending with the respondent authorities.

¶12

In view of the submission of learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents, I need not decide the truth or otherwise of the allegations made in the petition.

¶13

This Court is conscious that no such direction be issued in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in The Government of India v. P.Venkatesh¹ , 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. As the learned counsel for the petitioner himself requested to issue a direction to dispose of the representation dated 16.06.2022 submitted by the petitioner, I find no other alternative except to issue such direction.

¶14

In the result, Writ Petition is disposed of, while directing the 2^nd respondent to dispose of representation dated 16.06.2022 submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law, within four (04) from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶15

1 2019 (8) SCALE 544

¶16

¶17

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

¶18

also stand closed.

¶19

___________________________ DR.K. MANMADHA RAO, J

Date: 14.09.2022

THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

¶24

WRIT PETITION No.20028 OF 2022

¶25

Date: 14.09.2022

¶26

Abdul Khuddus v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Khuddus v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Maloth Vinod Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

K.Padmavathi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

A.Vijaya Santhi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Dr K Sreelatha Vs the Director of Medical Education State of Ap

Veeragandham Rajendra Prasad Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Dr. Kolli Prasanthi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh