Disposed¶35

Dr. a. Padmaja v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC13 Nov 2025WP/389/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

SVIMS Professor superannuation age enhancement 65 years; G.O.Ms.No.39 dated 29.07.2023; Memo E-Office Computer No. 348537, File No.SVIMS-ETC20NGL/1/2021-PA 76 PMO dt.14-11-2023 rejecting continuation; covered by order dated 05.11.2025 in W.P.No.29142 of 2023 and batch; Article 226 mandamus; Articles 14 and 16 Constitution; disposed in terms of earlier order; State of A.P. Higher Education Department; Section 151 CPC miscellaneous petitions dismissed; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed of in terms of the order dated 05.11.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.29142 of 2023 and batch (the Petitioner receives the same relief as granted in that order); no order as to costs; Registry directed to attach a copy of the said order; miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand dismissed as a sequel. ¶35

Dr. a. Padmaja Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the Respondents in rejecting the Petitioner's request to continue upto 65 years by enhancing the age of superannuation in terms of G.O.Ms.No.39 dated 29.07.2023 is illegal and arbitrary.

¶33

Court's answer

The issue involved in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the order dated 05.11.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.29142 of 2023 and batch, and the Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of that order.

¶35

Ratio / Principle

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶35

Key takeaways

The Registry is directed to attach the copy of the order dated 05.11.2025 passed in W.P.No.29142 of 2023 and batch to this order.ratio¶36
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand dismissed.ratio¶38

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Art. 226) by a retired Professor of the College of Nursing, SVIMS, Tirupati, challenging the Memo (E-Office Computer No. 348537, File No.SVIMS-ETC20NGL/1/2021-PA 76 PMO, dt.14-11-2023) issued by Respondents 2 and 3 rejecting her request to continue in service up to 65 years by enhancement of the age of superannuation in terms of G.O.Ms.No.39 dated 29.07.2023, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Held, disposing of the petition: the issue involved is squarely covered by the order dated 05.11.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.29142 of 2023 and batch; the Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of that order; there shall be no order as to costs; the Registry is directed to attach a copy of the said order; and miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand dismissed as a sequel. (Nyapathy Vijay, J., 14.11.2025)

¶1

APHC010000952024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3460]

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

FRIDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 389/2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

DR. A. PADMAJA, W/O DR. K. MUNUSWAMY, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC PROFESSOR (RETIRED) COLLEGE OF NURSING, SRI VENKATESWARA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES (SVIMS), TIRUPATI R/O BIRRD S DOCTORS QUARTERS NO.2, SVIMS CAMPUS, TIRUPATI-517501, ANDHRA PRADESH

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY TO GOVT OF AP, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶12

SRI VENKATESWARA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES SVIMS, THE UNIVERSITY ESTABLISHED BY ACT 12/1995, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR, TIRUPATI.

¶13

THE DIRECTORCUMVC, SRI VENKATESWARA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, TIRUPATI.

¶14

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶15

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 topleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the Memo E-Office Computer No. 348537, File

¶16

¶17

NO.SVIMS-ETC20NGL/1/2021-PA 76 PMO, dt.14-11-2023 issued by Respondents 2 and 3 rejecting the request of petitioners to continue up to 65 years by enhancing the age of superannuation of the petitioner in terms of GOMs No.39 dt.29-07-2023 is arbitrary, illegal and in violation of Article 14, and 16 of the Constitution of India, and to quash or set aside the same, and to issue a consequential direction to the respondents to continue the petitioner up to 65 years as Professor in the 2nd Respondent University with all consequential benefits such as pay and other service benefits etc., and to pass

¶18

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶19

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 pleased to direct Respondent 2 and 3 to consider the case of the petitioner for continuation in service as a Professor up to the age of 65 years by suspending the Memo E- Office Computer No. 348537, File No.SVIMS- ETC20NGL/1/2021PA 76 PMO, dt.14-11-2023 and to pass

¶20

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶21

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 pleased to grant leave to the 2nd and 3rd Respondent to file Counter petition in W.P. No. 389of 2024 before this Hon’ble Court and pass

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶23

1.A RAJENDRA BABU

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

1.MARELLA RADHA (SC FOR SVIMS)

¶26

2.NVS PRASADA VARMA

¶27

3.GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION (AP)

¶28

The Court made the following:

¶29

¶30

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶31

W.P.No.389 of 2024

¶32

ORDER :

¶33

This writ petition is filed declaring the action of the Respondents in rejecting the request of the Petitioner to continue upto 65 years by enhancing the age of superannuation in terms of G.O.Ms.No.39 dated 29.07.2023 as illegal and arbitrary.

¶34

Learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned standing counsel for the Respondents would submit that the issue involved in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the order dated 05.11.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.29142 of 2023 and batch and requested to pass a similar order in this Writ Petition also.

¶35

In view of the same, this Writ Petition is also disposed of in terms of the order, dated 05.11.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.29142 of 2023 and batch. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶36

Registry is directed to attach the copy of the order, dated 05.11.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.29142 of 2023 and batch to this order.

¶37

¶38

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions if any shall stand

¶39

dismissed.

¶40

___________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J

¶41

Date: 14.11.2025 KLP

Dr. a. Padmaja v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. a. Padmaja v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P Rama Devi Vs the State of Ap

B Jagan Vs the State of Ap

Chapati Venkata Pratyusha Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Suryas Ravi Prakash Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Mohammad Basha Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Nagularapu Kejiya Vs the State of Adhra Pradesh