Disposed

Grandhi Veera Kesava Murthy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC4 Jul 2024WP/8909/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking declaration of service proceedings as illegal and appointment to Special Grade Scale. The court directed the Government to act on the petitioner's application within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Government to dispose of the petitioner's application for special grade increments within six weeks.

Grandhi Veera Kesava Murthy, Vs The State of… — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

APHC010140652022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

[3310]

¶6

FRIDAY ,THE FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO: 8909/2022

¶10

Between:

¶11

Grandhi Veera Kesava Murthy,

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶15

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶17

1.O UDAYA KUMAR

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶19

1.GP FOR HOME

¶20

2.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶21

The Court made the following:

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

¶24

seeking the following relief:

¶25

“…..declaring the proceedings E1/181/2021, dated 15.11.2021, of Respondent No.3 as being illegal, stigma, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents No.3 to 7 to send proposals to Respondents No.1 and 2 and further direct the Respondents to appoint petitioner to 6 years Special Grade Scale of Sub-Registrar Gr-II, w.e.f. 28.01.2015 F.N., with all consequential benefits and interest at the rate of

¶26

¶27

24% from the said date and to pass and to pass such other order or orders.....”

¶28

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing for the respondents 1, 5 and 6 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing for the respondents 2 to 4.

¶29

Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has worked as SubRegistrar Gr-II for a period of six years i.e. from 28.01.2009 to 27.01.2015, as such he claimed Special Grade Post scale for six years. Accordingly, he made representations to the 3^rd respondent on 29.04.2021 and 17.05.2021 respectively through personally as well as through the 5^th respondent. The 3^rd respondent instead of forwarding the proposals, returned the same vide letter No.E1/181/2021, dated 15.11.2021 stating that since the petitioner was retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2020, hence the Government is the competent to sanction all the benefits. Hence the writ petition.

¶30

The 3^rd respondent filed counter while denying the allegations made in the petition, stated that, as per the administrative process, the sanctioning of Special grade post scale for six years, is 4^th respondent i.e., Deputy Inspector General (R&S) Eluru Range, but they refused and returned the petitioner’s application to the 3^rd respondent stating that the Government is the competent authority, since the petitioner already retired from service. Subsequently, as

¶31

¶32

per the direction of the 4^th respondent through letter No.E1/181/2021, dated 15.11.2021, the 3^rd respondent has submitted all the proposal of the petitioner to the Government for sanction orders of six years special grade increment, through 4^th respondent vide letter No.G3/Pension/348/2021, dated 18.07.2022 and awaited for reply answer. Further stated that the petitioner was also given punishment that three increments will be ordered to be recovered from his gratuity, as such, the special grade increment is pending. Hence sought for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶33

Having regard to the facts and circumstances and in view of the counter filed by the 3^rd respondent, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the 1^st respondent-Government to dispose of the letter of the 3^rd respondent vide No.G3/Pension/348/2021, dated 18.07.2022, in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶34

With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶35

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶36

________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.

¶37

ARR

¶38

¶39

HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO

¶40

WRIT PETITION NO.8909 OF 2022

¶41

Date: 05.07.2024

¶42

ARR

Grandhi Veera Kesava Murthy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Grandhi Veera Kesava Murthy, 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

E. S. Sai Prasad, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

S. Mahaboob Basha, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

V. Emmanuel Raju, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

M Anil Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Munj i Gayathri Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

G Siva Mallikarjuna Vs the State of Ap