Disposed

Sri Reddi Simhachalam v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC2 Sept 2024WP/12233/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition challenging the non-allowance of service up to age 62. Disposing at the admission stage, the court directed the respondent society to continue the petitioner in service till he attains the age of 62 years, citing a related batch judgment.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.5 to continue the petitioner in service till he attains the age of 62 years.

Sri Reddi Simhachalam Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

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

¶2

TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER fr ff?
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR < I

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTl^

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 12233 OF 2023

¶6

Between:

¶7

Sri Reddi Simhachalam, S/o.Reddi Suryanarayana, Occ Chief Executive Officer (CEO), aged about 60 years, R/o. H,No.3-25, Guchimi Village, Seethanagaram, Vizianagaram District, Andhra Pradesh ...Petitioner AND

¶8

^ ^*^5 state of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Agriculture and Co-operation Department, Secretariat, Amaravathi, Guntur District Andhra Pradesh.

¶9

The District Cooperative Officer, Parvathipuram District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶10

The Divisional Cooperative Officer, Parvathi Puram District, A.P.

¶11

Xu® Ltd., Vizinagaram rep by its Chief Executive Officer, (C.E.O.,), O/o. Central Office, Raja Bajar, Near Fort Junction, Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh.

¶12

The Guchimi Primary Agicultural Cooperative Credit Society, No.U-457 rep. by its Chair-Person of Person -Incharge Committee, Guchimi Village, Vizianagaram District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶13

...Respondents

¶14

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 issuance of an appropriate Writ, Order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.5 in issuing the Memo dated 04.05.2023 and respondent No.2 to 5 in not allowing the petitioner to be in service upto age of 62 in 5th Respondent even after passing resolution dated 04.05.2023 and further informing the petitioner that he would be superannuated from

¶15

31.05.2023, thought the petitioner is entitled to be service upto 62 years i.e. till 31.05.2025 and considering the amendment made vide G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR-IV-FR and LR) Department dated 31.01.2022 as Illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural justice, without any jurisdiction, violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of the

¶16

Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 and Rules made therein and consequently direct respondents to continue petitioner service till 62 years.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 20?.?

¶18

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 respondents to continue the service of the petitioner upto age of 62 years, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT BOBBA VIJAYALAKSHMI Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3: GP FOR SERVICES -I Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SMT V.UMADEVI

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.5: NONE

¶21

The Court made the following order:

¶22

APHC010232132023

¶23

ElflS

¶24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3331] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶25

TUESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶26

PRESENT

¶27

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶28

WRIT PETITION NO: 12233/2023

¶29

Between:

¶30

Sri Reddi Simhachalam ...PETITIONER

¶31

AND

¶32

The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶33

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶34

BOBBA VIJAYALAKSHMI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES 2.GP FOR COOPERATION

¶35

The Court made the following:

¶36

:: ORDER ::

¶37

The above writ petition is filed impugning the Memo^{dated04.05.2023,} whereby respondents 2 to 5 are not allowing the petitioner^to continue in service up to the age of 62 years, despite the resolution of three men

¶38

Page 2 of 4

¶39

SRS,J W.P.No.12233 of 2023

¶40

committee dated 04.05.2023 and informing the petitioner regarding continuation in service up to 62 years, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶41

Heard Sri Srinivas Basava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.Raju, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services appeared for respondents 1 to 3, and Smt.V.Umadevi, learned Standing Counsel appeared for respondent No.4. Notice of respondent No.5 is dispensed^{\A/ithbecauseof} filing of General Body Resolution dated 29.03.2024 vide U.S.R.No.68839 of 2024.

¶42

A memo dated 04.05.2023 (Ex.P2) was issued informing the petitioner about his superannuation. On the same day, a three-man committee passed a resolution extending the age of superannuation from 60 years to 62 years.

¶43

By order dated 09.05.2023, a learned Single Judge of this Court directed to continue the petitioner in service, without^{referencetothememo} dated 04.05.2023.

¶44

Pending writ petition, the General Body resolution of respondent No.5 was passed on 29.03.2024 extending the age of retirement of the petitioner from 60 years to 62 years.

¶45

At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the common order passed in W.P.No.3255 of 2023 and batch, dated 06.05.2024.

¶46

¶47

Page 3 of 4

¶48

SRS.J W.P.No.12233 of 2023

¶49

Learned Single Judge of this Court by a common judgment in W.P.No.3255 of 2023 and batch, upheld the power of society to enhance the age of superannuation from 60 to 62 years as per Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act and the Rules made there under. The issue involved in the writ petition is squarely covered by order in W.P.No.3255 of 2023 and batch. In fact, in pursuance of the common order, by following the same, writ petitions were disposed of at the admission stage.

¶50

Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of counsels, directing respondent No.5 to continue the petitioner in service, till he attains the age of 62 years. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶51

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any,^{shallstandclosed.}

¶52

SD/- K.SRINIVASA RAJU

¶53

To,

¶54

//TRUE COPY// ASSISTANij REGISTRAR SECPON OFFICER STATE OI?AP Co-operation Department Pradefh ' Amaravathi, Guntur District, Andhra ' JradeSf"'" Officer, Parvathipuram District, Andhra

¶55

3, The Divisional Cooperative Officer, Parvathi Puram District A P

¶56

One CC to Smt Bobba Vijayalakshmi, Advocate [OPUC]

¶57

One CC to Smt V.Umadevi, Advocate [OPUC]

¶58

Two CCS to GP for Services - I, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶59

Two CD Copies

RAM

HIGH COURT

DATED:03/09/2024

ORDER

WP.No.12233 of 2023

^^ofano;^
far
%
TO 2 5 SEP 20?A mit
* Current Section *9.

¶66

DISPOSING OF THE WP AT THE STAGE OF ADMISSION, WITHOUT COSTS

Sri Reddi Simhachalam v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Reddi Simhachalam v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Macharla Sri Rama Murthy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Sabbavarapu Srinivas Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Khaja Mohiddin Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

K v Krishna Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Lenka Rama Murthy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Banala Sudharshanam Vs the State of Ap