Disposed

Sri M. Durga Srinivasa Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC18 Sept 2024WP/20395/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A cooperative society CEO sought continuation in service up to age 62 after the Society's general body resolved to raise the retirement age from 60 to 62. The Government Pleader stated he was entitled to continue. The High Court disposed of the petition at admission, directing officials not to interfere with his service till age 62.

What did the court decide?

Respondents 2 and 3 directed not to interfere with petitioner's duties as CEO till age 62 per Society resolution dated 06.03.2024; no costs.

Sri M. Durga Srinivasa Rao, Vs The State of… — Cooperative Societies | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

A '

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 20395 OF 2024

¶6

Between:

¶7

Sri M. Durga Srinivasa Rao, S/o. M.Malikaquna Rao, aged about 60 Executive officer (CEO), M/s. Moyyeru PACS, R/o. H.No.3-31 Sivalayam St., Moyyeru (V), Ganpavaram (M) West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶8

...Petitioner

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Agriculture and Co-operation Department, Secretariat, Amaravathi, Andhra Pradesh.

¶11

^ The District Cooperative officer -DCO, West Godavari District Andhra Pradesh.

¶12

The District Co-operative Central Bank Limited, Eluru, rep. by its Chief Executive OJcer, (C.E.O.,), O/o. Panuganti vari Street,^R.R.Pet Eluru Eluru/West Godavari District, A.P.

¶13

^ Primary Agriculture Credit Society Ltd., No.2111, rep

¶14

by Its Off'cial PIC, Moyyeru (V), Ganpavaram Mandal, West Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶15

...Respondents

¶16

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 of an appropriate Writ, Order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 and 3 officials in preventing the petitioner to be in service upto age of 62 years, even after 4'^ Respondent passing resolution dated 06.03.2024 and 30.03.2024 by increasing the age of retirement from 60 to 62 years, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and contrary to the

¶17

¶18

principles of natural justice, violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 and Rules made therein.

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2n9d

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed i in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to continue the services of the petitioner 'till he attains the age of 62 years in 4*^ Respondent, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S.KARTHIK FOR SMT BOBBA VIJAYALAKSHMI

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents 1 & 2: GP FOR SERVICES - I Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI S.VIJAY KUMAR

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.4;

¶24

The Court made the following order:

■" (f-

APHC010398192024

0^0

0f.fr4:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶30

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶31

[3331]

¶32

THURSDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶33

PRESENT

¶34

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶35

WRIT PETITION NO: 20395/2024

¶36

Between:

¶37

M. Durga Srinivasa Rao

¶38

...PETITIONER

¶39

AND

¶40

The State of Andhra Pradesh and 3 others.

¶41

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶42

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶43

1.BOBBA VIJAYALAKSHMI

¶44

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶45

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶46

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶47

The writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

¶48

“...declaring the action of the respondent Nos.2 and 3 officials in preventing the petitioner to be in service upto age of 62 years , even after 4 respondent passing resolution dated 06.03.2024 and .03.2024 by increasing the age of retirement from 60 to 62 years as Illegal arbitrary, without jurisdiction and contrary to the principles of natural justice, violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 and Rules made therein and pass such other order or orders...

¶49

Page 2 of 4

¶50

SRSJ A Wp_20395_2024

¶51

Heard Sri S.Karthik, learned counsel representing Smt.B.Vijayala kshmi, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri R.S.Manidhar Pingali, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services for the respondents 1 & 2, Sri Vijay Kumar, learned standing counsel for 3'"^ respondent. Notice to the respondent is dispensed with, because of filing of the copy of resolution (Ex.P.4).

¶52

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been working as Chief Executive Officer (C.E.O) of the 4‘^ respondent Society. He would submit that the General Body of the said Society passed the resolution dated 06.03.2024 extending the age of superannuation of its employees from 60 years to 62 years. Despite the resolution, respondents 2 and 3 are preventing the petitioner from discharging his duties as C.E.O. Hence, the writ petition.

¶53

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services passed on instructions of the 2"'^ respondent wherein it was stated that the petitioner is entitled to continue in service till he attains the age of 62 years because of the resolution passed by the Society dated 06.03.2024. He would also submit that respondents 2 and 3 are not interfering with the petitioner’s discharging duties as C.E.O.

¶54

Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the consent of all the learned counsel, at the admission

SRS,J Wp_20395_2024

Page 3 of 4

Stage, directing the respondents 2 and 3 not to interfere with the petitioner’s discharging duties as C.E.O till he attains the age of 62 years as per the resolution dated 06.03.2024 passed by the 4*'^ respondent Society.

¶61

However, this order will not preclude the authorities from following the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 and the Rules made thereunder in case of any irregularities. No order as to costs.

¶62

As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.

¶63

Sd/-K.SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Principal Secretary, Agriculture and Co-operation Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Amaravathi, Andhra^Pradesh.

¶68

The District Cooperative officer -DCO, West Godavari^{District,Andhra} Pradesh.

¶69

The Chief Executive Officer, (C.E.O.,), District Co-operative^Central Bank Limited, Eluru, O/o. Panuganti vari Street, R.R.Pet,^Eluru, EluruA/Vest Godavari District, A.P.

¶70

The Official PIC, M/s. The Moyyeru Primary Agriculture^{CreditSociety} Ltd., No.2111, Moyyeru (V), Ganpavaram Mandal, West^Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶71

One CC to Smt Bobba Vijayalakshmi, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri N. Vijay Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Services -1, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 8. Two CD Copies

RAM

HIGH COURT

DATED: 19/09/2024

ORDER

WP.No.20395 of 2024

jfTOF AN6«^
0\i
O o I OCT 202'! m
Current Section
^S^SPATCHfe^