Disposed

Tammineni Rama Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC4 Aug 2024WP/2711/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the discontinuation of their old age pensions by the State and local authorities, alleging discrimination and lack of valid reasons. The High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing petitioners to apply for the pension in terms of G.O.Ms.No.103 dated 30.05.2019, upon which the authorities were directed to examine and decide within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directing petitioners to make an application for old age pension to Project Director, DRDA, as per G.O.Ms.No.103 dated 30.05.2019; respondents to examine and decide within four weeks.

Tammineni Rama Rao Vs The State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RA WRIT PETITION NO: 2711 OF 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

Tammineni Rama Rao, S/o Late Sanyasiappadu, Aged about 70 years, Occ: Oldage pension, RJo.Main Street, Penubarthi village, Ponduru

¶8

Mandal, SrikDkulam District

¶9

Tammineni Bharathi, W/o. Ananda Rao Aged about 37 years, Occ

¶10

single women pension, R/o.Thungupeta village,Layidam Post Rapaka Ponduru Mandal, Srikakulam District.

¶11

Rella Ramu, S/o. Srinsmulu, Aged about 68 years, Occ Oldage

¶12

pension, R/o.Dharmapuram village, Ponduru Mandal Srikakulam District.

¶13

Gurugibelli Ananda Rao, S/o.Late Narasayya, Aged about 68 years, Occ: Oldage pension, R/o.2-17,Main Veedi Dharmapuram village.

¶14

Ponduru Mandal, Srikakulam District.

¶15

Gurugubelli Polinaidu, S/o.Narasayya, Aged about 65 years, Occ Oldage pension, R/o.H.No.2-21Dhatmapumm village, Ponduru Mandal, Srikakulam District

¶16

Modhalavalasa Suryanarayana, S/o.Late Amanna, Aged about 68

¶17

years, Occ Oldage pension. R/o.2-206,Dharamapuram village, Ponduru Mandal, Srikakulam District.

¶18

...PETITIONERS

¶19

AND

¶20

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Panchayath Raj Rural Development Department, Govt, of AP Secretariat at Velagapudi, Amnravathi, Guntur District.

¶21

¶22

The CEO.(SERF), 2 nd Floor, NTR Administrative premises PNBS Block, Krishna Lanka, Vijayawada, Krishna District

¶23

•i'

¶24

The District Collector, Srikakulam District, Srikakulam.

¶25

The Project Director, District Rural Development Authority (DRDA)Cummember Convener District Pension community, Srikakulam^District.

¶26

The Mandal Parshad Development Officer( MPDO), Cum-member Convener Mandal pension Community, Ponduru Mandal,^Srikakulam District.

¶27

...RESPONDENTS

¶28

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 in the nature of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction, order or orders declaring the action of the respondents, particularly the 4**^ and 5‘^ respondents without issued any Notice without Assigned reasons Stop the Old age /Single Women, Physical Handicapped/Pension is illegal. Discriminatory by the 4th and 5th respondents without Enquiry without verified the documents through the directly Stop the oldage/Single Women pension, by the petitioners have drawing the Social security pension up to January 2020^{i.eYSRPension} Kanuaka is clear violation of the GO MS No. 174 AND GO MS No. 83 Dt. 27-03-2006 and also another GO MS No. 103 Dt 30-05-2019 is highly illegal, improper, unjust. Principal of Natural Justice and in violation of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and Consequently direct the respondents to pay the Petitioners oldage/Single women/disabilit y Monthly pension by the Respondents /Petitioners release arrears for February to still now at situated Penubarthi Village, Ponduru Mandal,^{SrikakulamDistrict.}

¶29

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶30

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 4*^ & 5*'^ respondents to pay the monthly oldage/Single

¶31

women /widow/disability /pensions to the petitioners by the respondents release arrears for 11 to 12 months due date February,2020 to still now at situated Penubarthi village, Ponduru Mandal, Srikakulam District pending

¶32

disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶33

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI KRISHNA RAO MODHALAVALASA Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEVELOPMENT

¶34

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 4: SRI HARISH KUMAR RASINENI ^ r, SC FOR SERP & DRDA Counsel for the Respondent No.3: GP FOR REVENUE

¶35

Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI N. SRIHARI, SC FOR ZPP, MPP & GRAM PANCHAYAT The Court made the following: ORDER

¶36

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶37

WRIT PETITION No.2711 of 2021

¶38

ORDER:

¶39

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the^{Constitutionof}

¶40

India for the following relief;

¶41

¶42

"... to issue a writ in the nature of a writ of mandamus^oranyother appropriate writ, direction, order or orders declaring^the action of the respondents particularly the 4’^ & 5**^ respondents^{withoutissuedany} Notice without assigned reasons stop the Old age/Single Women/Physical Handicapped/Pension is illegal Discriminatory^bythe ■4f & 5"^ respondents without enquiry and without verified the documents through directly stop' the oldage/Single Women/pension by the petitioners have drawing the Social security pension^{uptoJanuary2020} e , Y.S.R. Pension Kanuka is clear violation of the^{GOMs.No.174and} also GO Ms:No.83 Dt.27.03.2006 and also another GO Ms.No.103 Dt.30.05.2019 is highly illegal, improper, unjust. Principal of Natural Justice and in violation of Article 14, 16 and 21 of^{theConstitutionof} India, and Consequently direct the respondents to Pay^{thepetitioners} Oldage/single women/disability/monthly pension by the petitioners Ponduru arrears February to still Now at situated Penubarthi village, Mandal, Srikakulam District and pass " th 2. The present Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the^actionofthe4 and respondents in discontinuing the oldage pension to the petitioners without assigning any reasons.

¶43

The present Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the^actionofthe4 and respondents in discontinuing the oldage pension to the petitioners without assigning any reasons. 3. It is the case of the petitioners herein that the Village^Secretary,in collusfon with the Ward SecretaryA/olunteer, has granted oldage pension to the ineligible candidates by manipulating^{Aadharcardand} other relevant cards and the petitioners, who are eligible,^havenotbeen granted oldage pension. Therefore, prayed to direct^{therespondentsto}

¶44

¶45

grant oldage pension to the petitioners herein, ini pursuance of the G.O.Ms.No.103 dated 30.05.2019.

¶46

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the petitioners to make an application for oldage pension in pursuance of the G.O.Ms.No.103 dated 30.05.2019 to the Project Director, DRDA, who is monitoring the implementation of the programme at district level under the supervision of the District Collector and. on making such an application by the petitioners herein, the respondents are hereby directed to examine the issue and pass appropriate orders for granting oldage pension in favour of the petitioners, if the petitioners ere otherwise eligible, as per G.O.Ms.No.103 dated 30.05.2019 and communicate the decision to the petitioners within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of the order. 5. With the above directions, the present Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶47

As a sequel, Interlocutory applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶48

¶49

To,

¶50

SDI- SHAIK MOHD. RAFI //TRUE COPY// assistant registrar

¶51

SECTION OFFICER

¶52

The Principal Secretary, Panchayath Raj Rural Development Department, State of Andhra Prades, Govt, of AP Secretariat at Velagapudi, Amnravathi, Guntur District

¶53

The CEO, (SERP), 2 nd Floor NTR Administrative premises PNBS Block

¶54

Krishna Lanka Vizayawada Krishna District

¶55

The District Collector, Srikakulam District, Srikakulam.

¶56

The Project Director, District Rural Development Authority ,

¶57

(DRDA)CUM-member Convener District Pension community Srikakulam District.

¶58

The Mandal Parshad Development Officer( MPDO), Cum-member Convener Mandal pension Community Ponduru Mandal Srikakulam District.

¶59

One CC to Sri Krishna Rao Modhalavalasa, Advocate [OPUC]

¶60

One CC to Sri Harish Kumar Rasineni, SC for SERP[OPUC] 8. One CC to Sri N. Srihari, SC for ZPP, MPP & Gram Panchayat[OPUC] 9. Two CCs to GP for Panchayat Raj & Rural Development,^HighCourtof Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶61

Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh.

¶62

[OUT]

¶63

Three CD Copies.

ssb

HIGH COURT

DATED:05/08/2024

ORDER

WP.No.2711 of 2021

anoh^
5 1 2 AUG 7m Cotmli
^ . Current Section .

¶70

DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS

Tammineni Rama Rao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tammineni Rama Rao 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K. Nagendra Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

K.Venkata Narayana Raju, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Vadde Mahesh, S/o Lingaiah Vs The State of A.P.

D.Ratna Kumari, Vs Dr. Siva Kumar

Chennupati Venkateshwar Rao at Venkatesh Vs The Deputy Registrar

Gunisetty Sivaiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Forest Department