S.v.Seshagiri Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

S.V.SESHAGIRI R AO, S.V.SESHAGIRI RAO, S/ O LATE SRI PURNACHANDRA RAO, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, WORKING AS JUNIOR ASSISTA N T (UNDER REMOVAL), DISTRI C T SCHEDULE CASTE SERVICE C OOPERATIVE LTD., ELURU, WES T GODAVARI.

¶11

CH. JOHNSON, C H . JOHNSON, S/O LATE SRI C.H. SUBRAMANYAM, AGED ABOUT 5 5 YEARS, WORKING AS JUNIO R ASSISTANT, (UNDER REMOV A L), DISTRICT SCHEDULE CA S TE SERVICE COOPERATIVE LTD., ELURU, WEST GODAVARI.

¶12

K. YOHAN, K. YO H AN, STO LATE SRI NANDIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, WORKIN G AS JUNIOR ASSISTANT, (UNDER REMOVAL), DISTRICT SHED U LE CASTE SERVICE COOPE R ATIVE LTD., ELURU, WEST GODAVARI.

¶13

P. VIJAYANANDA S ARMA, P. VIJAYANANDA SARMA, S/O LATE SRI VIJAYA SARADHI, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, WORKI N G AS JUNIOR ASSISTANT, (UN D ER REMOVAL), DISTRICT SCH E DULE CASTE SERVICE COOPE R ATIVE LTD., ELURU, WEST GODA V ARI.

¶14

M. SRINIVASA RA O , M. SRINIVASA RAO, S/O LATE S R I RAMA RAO, AGED ABOUT 4 7 YEARS, WORKING AS JUNIO R ASSISTANT, (UNDER REMOV A L), DISTRICT SCHEDULE CA S TE SERVICE COOPERATIVE LTD., ELURU, WEST GODAVARI.

¶15

2

¶16

CH.L.N.KRISHNAN, CH.L.N.KRISHNAN, S/O LATE SRI DHRUVESHWAR RAO, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, WORKING AS JUNIOR ASSISTANT, (UNDER REMOVAL), DISTRICT SCHEDULE CASTE SERVICE COOPERATIVE LTD., ELURU, WEST GODAVARI.

¶17

...PETITIONER(S)

¶18

AND

¶19

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶20

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶21

ANDHRA PRADESH SCHEDULED CASTES, ANDHRA PRADESH SCHEDULED CASTES CO-OPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION LTD, REP BY ITS VICE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, 4TH FLOOR, S.P.RIVER VIEW BUILDING, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶22

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR / CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT SCHEDULE CASTES SERVICE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶23

THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, DISTRICT SCHEDULE CASTES SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶24

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶25

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, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing email Proceedings in Rc.No. E-19220/2017 dated 30-12-2017 as arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional and without jurisdiction and set aside the same in the interest of justice and pass

¶26

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶27

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

¶28

3

¶29

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶30

1.M SHALINI

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶32

1.GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE (AP)

¶33

2.GANDRALA RATHNA KUMAR SC For APSCCFC LTD

¶34

3.GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING (AP)

¶35

The Court made the following:

¶36

4

¶37

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶38

WRIT PETITION NO: 2420 OF 2018

¶39

ORDER:-

¶40

The present Writ Petition is filed declaring the action of the Respondents in issuing e-mail Proceedings in Rc.No.E-19220/2017, dated 30.12.2017 as arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional and without jurisdiction and set aside the same in the interest of justice.

¶41

The case of the Petitioners is that they have joined the Respondent/ Corporation as NMR/ Daily Wage and they have been discharging duties since 1983. Since the Petitioners have fulfilled all the requisite qualifications and conditions specified in G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994, they sought regularization of their services, since the same was not considered by the Respondents, the Petitioners were constrained to file W.P.No. 12503 of 1997; W.P.No.7482 of 1990 and W.P.No.10236 of 1990. This Court in W.P.No.12503 of 1997, vide order dated 05.11.1997, while disposing of the same has observed that the relief sought in those Writ Petitions are identical to the decision of “ APCS Co-Operative Finance Corporation v. T. Niranjana

¶42

Rao”¹ , therefore directed the Respondents to consider the case of the Petitioners for regularization, if they are still in service. Pursuant to the directions of this Court, they were given time scale attached to the post of Junior Assistant. Accordingly, PRC 1993, 1999, 2005 and 2010 were paid, increments from 2000 to 2014 along with Special Grade increments in 2008

¶43

1 1993(3) ALT 527

¶44

5

¶45

was also paid to them. However, the grievance of the Petitioners in the present case is that when the Respondents have initiated steps to reduce time scale, without considering the issue of their regularization, the Petitioners were once again constrained to file W.P.No. 41896 of 2015. This Court, vide order, dated in W.P.M.P.No.37 of 2016 suspended the impugned proceedings therein, through which, the minimum time scale was reduced and further directed the Respondents to release their salaries forthwith. As the said order was not complied by the Respondents, the Petitioners have filed a Contempt Case No.145 of 2017. It is the case of the Petitioners that the Respondent/ Corporation being prejudiced by filing the said Contempt Case, as a counterblast has highhandedly lodged a complaint as against the Petitioners and the then officers, who paid salaries in terms of the Court Orders, vide FIR No.207 of 2017, dated 11.10.2017.

¶46

While the matter stood thus, the Respondents issued the impugned e-mail dated 30.12.02017 removing the Petitioners from service on permanent basis. Aggrieved by which, the present Writ Petition came to be filed.

¶47

When the matter came up for admission on 29.01.2018, this Court passed the interim order that “ Therefore, there shall be interim suspension as prayed for” .

¶48

Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel, representing the Respondents has issued a copy of the written instructions of the Respondent No.6, wherein it is stated that in pursuance of

¶49

6

¶50

the interim order passed by this Court, the Petitioners were being continued to work in the Corporation and out of six (06) Petitioners herein, five Petitioners have got retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation and one among them Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao i.e Petitioner No.5 is being continued in service.

¶51

It is further stated that in view of pendency of the criminal case as against the Petitioners i.e C.C.No.290 of 2019 only, the Respondent/ Corporation could not release the terminal benefits to the Petitioners, though except Petitioner No.5 got retired from service as per G.O.Rt.No.1097, dated 22.06.2000, F&P (F.E Pen.1) Department as per rules in vogue, in case of Government employees against whom the Departmental Proceedings or Criminal Proceedings are pending at the time of retirement, all the terminal benefits need not be released.

¶52

On perusal of the impugned proceedings, it can be observed that in pursuance of the impugned order passed by this Court, the Petitioners were continued in service and Petitioners No.1 to 4 and 6 have retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation and Petitioner No.5 is being continued as of now. But however, in view of the pendency of the Criminal Case, terminal benefits could not be released to the Petitioners No.1 to 4 and 6. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that the relief in the writ petition is pending in respect of Petitioner No.5 alone, who is admittedly continued in service in pursuance of the interim order passed by this Court on 29.01.2018.

¶53

7

¶54

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed, while setting aside the

¶55

impugned e-mail Proceedings in Rc.No.E-19220/2017, dated 30.12.2017 issued by the Respondents. However, leaving it open to the Respondents to release the terminal benefits to the Petitioners in accordance with law, subject

¶56

to result of the Criminal Case pending against them. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶57

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

¶58

___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶59

Date: 06.07.2026

¶60

KK

¶61

Whether the order is :