Allowed

K Gopalakrishna v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC13 Oct 2023WP/8638/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition filed by 28 outsourced Data Entry Operators seeking declaration that the State's failure to pay enhanced salaries as per G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 17.01.2022 is illegal and arbitrary. The Court held the petitioners are entitled to the enhanced rate.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to pay salary/remuneration to petitioners in pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 17.01.2022 from the date of the order.

K Gopalakrishna Vs State of Andhra… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI / (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE l

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 8638 OF 2023

¶6

Betw 01.	een: K.GopalakrishnaS/o.Anjaneyulu, aged28years,Occ:DEO(Inkollu), R/o.Cherukuru(V),Inkollu(M), BapatlaDistrict.
02.	MahaboobBashaS/o.PeddaMabuSaheb, aged27years.Occ:DEO(Arthaveedu) R/o.Arthaveedu(V&M),PrakasamDist.,
03.	G.AshokBabuS/o.Lazar, aged25years,Occ:DEO(Ballikurava) R/o.Kopparapalem(V),Ballikurava(M), PrakasamDistrict.
04.	G.BharatSimhaReddyS/o.G.R.Reddy, aged28years,Qcc:DEO(Besthavaripeta), R/o-Ravipadu(V),Cumbum(M),PrakasamDist.,
05.	Ch.PrasadS/o.PeddaMalakondaiah, aged26years,Occ:DEO(CSPuram) R/o.Mogalluru(V),C.S.PuramMandal, PrakasamDistrict.
06.	ReddyRojaW/o.Satyanarayana, aged24years,Qcc:DEO(Chinaganzam), R/o.Kadavakuduru(V),Chinnaganjam(M BaptlaDistrict.
07.	P.SireeshaD/o.Ramanaiah, aged25years,Occ:DEO(Chimakurthy). R/o.Chimakurthy(V&M),PrakasamDist.,
08.	P.VenkataGopalSio.SrinivasaRao, aged27years,Occ:DEO(Chirala),. R/o.Chirala(V&M),BapatlaDist.,
09.	B.VeeranjaneyuluS/o.Kondaiah, aged28years, DEO(Cumbum), R/o.Meerjapeta{V),Konkanamitta(M), PrakasamDistrict.
10.	K.MadhaviD/o.PrabhakaraRao, aged26years,Occ:DEO(Donakonda), R/o.Sanduvaripalem,Darsi(M),PrakasamDis.,
11.	RMantrhuNaikS/o.AmarsinghNaik aged26years,Occ;DEO(DornalaP) R/o.NarajamulaThanda,Pullalacheruvu(M), PrakasamDistrict.

¶7

12.	K.KiranKumarS/o.BhaskaraRao, aged26years,Occ:DataEntryOperator, R/o.Addanki(T&M),BapatlaDistrict.
13.	K.RaviTejaS/o.Samyelu, aged27years,Occ:DEO(dPanguluru) R/o.Addanki(V&M},BapatlaDist.,
14.	P.SandeepSio.Seshaiah, aged25years,Occ:DEO(Karamchedu), R/o.Ongole(T&M),PrakasamDist.,.
15.	G.VeeraRaghavaiahS/o.Ramaiah aged27years,Occ:DEO(Korisapadu), R/o.Kurichedu(V&M),PraksamDist.,
16.	G.VenkataReddyS/o.G.KrishnaReddy, aged28years,Occ:DEO(Kurichedu), Rio.Kurichedu(V&M},PrakasamDist.,
17.	P.SomaiahS/o.RajendraRao, aged26years,Occ:DEO(Marripudi), R/o.Gundlasamudram(V),Marripudi(M), PrakasamDistrict.
18.	M.GopiS/o.KrishnaRao, aged26years,Occ:DEO(Martur), Rio.Bodepalli(V),Martur(M),BapatlaDist.,
19.	G.VenkateswarluS/o.SrinivasaRao, aged27years,Occ:DEO(Naguluppalapadu), R/o.CourtCentre,Ongole,PrakasamDist.,
20.	R.DhanunjayaSio.NageswaraRao, aged26years,Occ:DEO(Pamuru),
	R/o.Gannavaram(V),Pamuru(M),PrakasamDist.,
21.	S.GeethaBhavaniW/o.RamakrishnaPrasad, aged27years,Occ:DEO(Peddaraveedu), R/o.Markapur(V&M),PrakasamDist.,
22.	R.YedukondaluNaikS/o.SathiNaik, aged25years,Occ:DEO(Pullalacheruvu), R/o.S.K.Thanda,Pullalacheruvu(M), PrakasamDistrict.
23.	K.S.SubbaRaoS/o.Subbaiah, aged28years,DEO(Santhamaguluru), R/o.Ballikurava(V&M),BapatlaDistrict.
24.	ARaviKumarS/o.A.V.BhaskaraRao, aged26years,Occ:DEO(Santhanuthalapadu), R/o.Sakavaram(V),V.V.Palem(M),PrakasamDist.,
25.	SKoteswarammaD/o.YelamandaReddy, aged28years,Occ:DEO(Veligandla), R/o.Veligandla(V&M),PrakasamDist.,
26.	G.AnkammaRaoS/o.SubbaRao, aged26years,Occ:DEO(Yeddanapudi, R/o.Darsi(V&M},PrakasamDist.,

¶8

¶9

27.	F3.VenkataReddyS/o.B.V.Reddy, aged27years,Occ:DEO(Yerragondapalem), R/o.Miiraripalli(V),Y.Palem(M),PrakasamDist., AND	..Petitioners
01.	StateofAndhraPradeshrepbyits PrincipalSecretary,PanchayatRajDept., Secreatariat,Velagapudi,Guntur.
02.	Commissioner&Director PanchayatRaj&RuralDevelopment, PrathuruRoad,Tadepalli(M),GunturDist.,
03.	Collector&DistrictMagistrate, PrakasamDistrictatOngole.
04.	DistrictPanchayatOfficer, Ongole,PrakasamDistrict.
05.	A.F.CorporationforOutSourcedServices, 2ndFloor,NTRAdministrative$lock, FNBS,VijayawadarepbyitsManagingDirector.	..Respondents

¶10

I ,

¶11

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 to issue a Writ/Order! Direction more particularly one in the Nature^of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not paying Salaries to the petitioners in terms of G.O.Ms.No. ? Finance (HR.I PlgandPplicy) Dept., dt. 17.01.2022 in their respective Mandals as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction besides violation of Art..10 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay salaries to the Petitioners directly from 5th respondent in terms of G.O.Ms.No.7 Finance (HR.I PlgandPplicy) Dept., dt.17.Q1.2022 forthwith.

¶12

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶13

¶14

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 5th Respondent to release the Salary of the Petitioners from the month of April, 2023 in terms of G.0.Ms.No.7' Finance (HR.I PlgandPolicy) Dept., dt.17.01.2022 directly from the said authority forthwith pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI SRINIVASULU KURRA

¶16

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES - IV

¶17

The Court made the following: order

¶18

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶19

WRIT PETITION No.8638 of 2O23

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

¶22

".... to issue a Writ/Order/Direction more particularly one in the Nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not paying Salaries to the petitioners in terms of G.O.Ms.No.7 Finance (HR.I Pig & Policy) Dept., Dept., dt.17.01.2022 in their respective Mandals as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction besides violation of Art. 10 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay salaries to the Petitioners directly from 5th respondent in terms of G.O.Ms.No.7 Finance (HR.1 Pig. & Policy) Dept., dt.17.01.2022 including arrears forthwith and to pass "

¶23

The brief facts of the case are that, petitioner No.l was appointed as Data Entry Operator in Addanki Mandal vide proceedings Roc. No.933 / 2017 (Pts) A4 dated 06.06.2019 through process of selection. Other petitioners have also undergone the procedure of selection and ultimately selected through process, thereby appointed as Data Entry Operators in their respective Mandals. Prior to their selection, the respondent/ State issued certain guidelines by revising the remuneration payable to the outsourced services as indicated therein. As per G.O.Ms.No.151

¶24

¶25

V S,J wp_8638_2023

¶26

dated 08.08.2016, remuneration fixed to all the petitioners is at Rs.15,000/- for the post of Data Entry Operators. However, due to technical issues they are paying Rs.10,000/- only.

¶27

It is further contended that since 2019 all the petitioners are working in their respective Mandals as Data Entry Operators without having any blemish whatsoever against their services. In the year, 2019 itself the State Government cancelled middlemen interference in the matter of employees appointed either through outsourcing or through an agencies attached to respondent No.S for all purposes including payment of salaries directly from respondent No.5 to an employee. Respondent No.3 communicated the proceedings in Rc.No.380/2021 (pan) A6 dated 02.06.2021 through which instructed to pay the salaries to all the employees appointed through respondent No.S. Because of inaction on the part of the respondents, the petitioners are losing remuneration to a tune of Rs.5,000/- every month as they are being paid Rs.10,000/- per month instead of Rs.15,000/- per month which is quite against the principles of law besides violation of the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The said action of 2nd and 5th respondents is wholly arbitrary and without jurisdiction.

¶28

¶29

vS,J wp_8638_2023

¶30

It is further contended that, in the year, 2022 on 17.01.2022 respondent No.1 again issued G.O.Ms.No.7 Finance (HR.I PLg & Policy) Department, enhancing the pay to Rs.18,500/- from Rs.15,000/- as fixed through G.O.Ms.No.151. However, because of the inaction on the part of the respondents in not clarifying the issues raised by respondent No.2, they are unable to receive the payment as fixed in the said Government Order. G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 17.01.2022 is squarely applicable to all these petitioners and hence, they are entitled to draw salary as per enhancement in terms of the above G.O. as they were selected and appointed through outsourcing agency. Hence, non-payment of enhanced salary to the petitioners is wholly arbitrary, illegal besides violative of Article 18 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

¶31

Respondent No.4 - District Panchayat Officer, Prakasam District has filed counter contending that as per the proceedings PR & RD No.7469/CPR&RD/H1-e.pts/2016 dated 05.09.2018, the Commissioner has stated that under RGSA of 2016-17 financial year, the Ministry of Panchayat Raj, Government of India has fixed the remuneration to the man power at Divisional

¶32

¶33

VS,J wp_8638_2023

¶34

level and Mandal level as per the CEC (Central Empowered

¶35

Committee) approvals as mentioned below.

¶36

S1.No.	Divisional/Mandal	RateofRenunciation
1.	DivisionalLevel (DivisionalLevelCoordinators)	Rs.15,000/-permonth
2.	MandalLevel(DataEntry Operators)	Rs.10,000/-permonth

¶37

It is further contended that the services of the petitioners were engaged on outsourcing basis through the Manager, Sri Kanaka Durga Man Power Services, Ongole in Prakasam District, which is a private agency and positioned as Mandal Level Data Entry Operators with a fixed remuneration of Rs.10,000/- per month and Divisional Coordinators with a fixed remuneration of Rs. 15,000/- per month as was fixed by the Government of India vide proceedings No.933/2018 (Pts.) A4 dated 06.06.2019. The payments shall be done to the concerned agencies subject to availability of scheme funds and scheme allocation under the category of support to District Panchayat Resource Centers (Human Resources). Hence, the petitioners cannot claim uniform remuneration as they are engaged on temporary, need based and for a limited purpose.

¶38

It is further contended by the respondents that as per G.O.Ms.No.151 dated 08.08.2016 the remuneration of the State

¶39

¶40

wp_8638_2023

¶41

Government Outsourcing employees is fixed at Rs.15,000/- for the post of Data Entry Operators and by subsequent G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 17.01.2022, the said remuneration is enhanced to Rs.18,500/-, but here the job of the petitioners was based on work load and the availability of funds under RGSA scheme, hence, the petitioners are not entitled to enhancement of remuneration as per G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 17.01.2022, and requested to dismiss the writ petition.

¶42

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Services - IV.

¶43

Undisputedly, the petitioners were appointed as Data Entry Operators on outsourcing basis vide proceedings in ROC No.933/2017 (Pts) A4 dated 06.06.2019 basing on the selection list vide Rc.No.A1/Estt-DEO/2019 dated 06.06.2019 issued by the District Employment Officer, Ongole, Prakassm, by the respondents. In the year 2016, the State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.151 Finance (HR-1 Pig. & Policy) Department dated 08.08.2016, fixing the remuneration to outsourcing employees. The post "Data Entry Operator" is shown at SI.No.8 of Category - II in Annexure-II and their remuneration is fixed at Rs.15,000/- per month. Later, the State Government issued

¶44

¶45

VS,J wp_8638_2023

¶46

G.O.Ms.No.7 Finance (HR-I-Pig. & Policy) Department dated 17.01.2022 enhancing the remuneration to various categories of Outsourced man power. By the said G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 17.0 1.2022 the remuneration of the Data Entry Operators is enhanced to Rs.18,500/- per month.

¶47

In the present case, the petitioners were appointed vide proceedings in ROC No.933/2017 (Pts) A4 dated 06.06.2019. But, nowhere it is stated in the said proceedings that the petitioners are entitled for the remuneration as per the proceedings issued by the Commissioner PR & RD No.7469 / CPR&RD / H 1-e. pts/ 2016 dated 05.09.2018, wherein it is stated that the authorities fixed remuneration to the man power at Divisional level is Rs. 15,000/- per month and at Mandal level (Data Entry Operators) is Rs.10,000/- per month. It is also not mentioned in the appointment proceedings of the petitioners that their job is based on work load and the availability of funds under RGSA Scheme as contended by the learned Government Pleader. Further, the said proceedings dated 05.09.20 18 have not even cited as reference in appointment orders of the petitioners. However, G.O.Ms.No.151 Finance (HR-I-Pig & Policy) Department dated 08.08.2016 was cited as Reference No.1 in the selection

V S,J wp_8638_2023

proceedings vide Rc. No.A 1/ Estt-DEO / 2019 dated 06.06.2019, whereby the remuneration of the Data Entry Operators was fixed at Rs.15,000/- per month. Therefore, it can be inferred that the petitioners, who are appointed as Data Entry Operators, are entitled for remuneration at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- per month, which was later on enhanced to Rs. 18,500/- per month as per G.O.Ms.No.7 dated 17.01.2022.

¶52

In view of my aforesaid discussion, the writ petitioners are entitled for remuneration as per G.O.Ms.No.7 Finance (HR.I-Plg. & Policy) Department dated 17.01.2022.

¶53

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed directing the respondents to pay salary/ remuneration to the petitioners in pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.7 Finance (HR.I-Plg. & Policy) Department dated 17.0 1.2022 from the date of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶54

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶55

Sd/- S.SRINIVASA PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// /,43T'.SECTION OFFICER

¶56

To,

¶57

The Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Dept., State of Andhra^Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur.

¶58

The Commissioner and Director Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, Prathuru Road, Tadepalli(M), Guntur Dist.,

¶59

The Collector and District Magistrate, Prakasam District at^Ongole.

¶60

The District Panchayat Officer, Ongole, Prakasam District. 5. The Managing Director, A.P. Corporation for Out Sourced Services,^2ndFloor, NTR Administrative Block, PNBS, Vijayawada.

¶61

One CC to Sri Srinivasulu Kurra, Advocate [OPUC]

¶62

Two CCs to GP for Services - IV, High Court of Andhra^{Pradesh. [OUT]}

¶63

Two CD Copies

RAM

HIGH COURT

DATED:13/10/2023

ORDER

• ANr~ti .<
2a OCT 2523
c ?,i
Currant SG:• . .
n P.__ .. . .

¶69

WP.No.8638 of 2023

¶70

DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

K Gopalakrishna v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K Gopalakrishna v. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Mudiyam Chandra Sekhar Reddy Vs the State of Andrha Pradesh

Yaddanapudi Surya Narayana Sarma, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Talari Meghanath, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

C. Lakshmi Narayana Vs the State of Ap

V Satyanarayana Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Meera Vali Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh