Allowed

Satupati Chandra Kala v. The Acharya N.G Ranga Agricultural University

Andhra Pradesh HC16 Sept 2026WP/35339/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition filed by the second wife of a deceased university employee seeking family pension and death benefits. The first wife had objected citing conduct rules prohibiting second marriage during subsistence of first marriage. The court found the second marriage was contracted after a valid divorce decree (O.P. No.19 of 1997), the first wife had no objection and was remarried with government employment, and directed release of pensionary benefits within two months and consideration of compassionate employment for a son.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent authorities to release all pension-related benefits to the petitioner within two months and to consider compassionate employment application for one of her sons in accordance with law.

Satupati Chandra Kala Vs The Acharya… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

[3330]

¶2

APHC010582922022

¶3

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

¶4

THURSDAY, T HE 17^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 35339/2022

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SATUPATI CHAN D RA KALA, W/o.LATE SATUPATI SRINIVASU OCC: HOUSE 'WIFE, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/o.H. N o.9-3-14 PAPINENI VARI VEEDHI, BAPATLA, GUNTUR D I STRICT, A.P.522101.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

THE ACHARYA N G RANGA AGRICULTURAL UNI V ERSITY, DR.NTR COLLE G E OF AGRICULTURAL ENGIN E ERING, BAPATLA REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR

¶12

THE REGISTRAR, ACHARYA N.G.RANGA AGRIC U LTURAL UNIVERSITY ADMI N ISTRATIVE OFFICE- LAM, GUNTUR, A.P-522 034

¶13

THE ASSOCIAT E DEAN FAC, DR.NTR COLLE G E OF AGRICULTURAL E N GINEERING BAPATLA, GUNTUR D I STRICT, A.P

¶14

KATTA MAHALAK S HMI, W/O.LATE SRINIVASU, OCC S .I., C/O. CHIRALA (II TOW N ) POLICE STATION, KOTHAPETA, C HIRALA, BAPATLA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 5 2 3 157. RESPONDENT N O .4 IMPLEADED AS PER COURT ORDER DATED 26.02.2024 VIDE I.A.NO. 1 OF 2023 IN WP NO. 3 5339 OF 2022.

¶15

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶16

Petition under Articl e 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High C ourt may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Directi o n, more

¶17

¶18

particularly in the nature of a mandamus declaring that the inaction of the 2nd respondent herein in considering the Petitioner's representation dt.22.08.2022 seeking to review the proceedings issued by the 2nd Respondent vide Memo No.9920/0P/A1/2022 dated.04.07.2022, as wholly arbitrary, illegal, contrary to A.P Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964, besides being violative of the petitioners rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to release family pension and death benefits to the Petitioners herein and / or pass such other order or orders.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶20

1.N SAI PHANINDRA KUMAR

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶22

1.K KOUTILYA

¶23

2.N ANULA

¶24

3.S PRANATHI

¶25

The Court made the following:

¶26

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

The Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the 2^nd respondent in not considering the petitioner’s representation dated 18.08.2022 which sought for a review of the proceedings issued by the 2^nd respondent vide Memo No.9920/OP/A1/2022, dated 04.07.2022, claiming that it is wholly arbitrary, illegal and contrary to A.P. Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964.

¶29

The petitioner is the second wife of the late Satupati Srinivasu, who received a promotion as an administrative officer and latter passed away on 21.01.2022 due to health issues.

¶30

The petitioner’s sister, i.e., the first wife of the deceased employee, submitted a representation on 05.05.2022 requesting the authorities to provide all retirement benefits to the petitioner and compassionate employment to one of the petitioner’s sons. The 2^nd respondent rejected this request on 04.07.2022, citing Rule 25 of the A.P. Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964. The said rule outlined that if a second marriage is contracted while the first marriage is still subsisting it contravenes Rules 3 and 25 of A.P. Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 and is liable for punishment.

¶31

Following this, the petitioner filed a representation on 18.08.2022 to review the order dated 04.07.2022, asserting that second marriage was contracted after obtaining a decree of divorce in O.P. No.19 of 1997 and

¶32

¶33

thus it is does not contravene Rules 3 and 25 of A.P. Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964. It is argued by the counsel for the petitioner that

¶34

the respondents have not disposed of the said representation, consequently, the present Writ Petition is filed to compel the respondent authorities to grant all pensionary benefits of the deceased employee to the petitioner.

¶35

It is acknowledged that the 4^th respondent is the first wife of the deceased employee and her name was entered in the service register of the employee as nominee. The counsel for the 4^th respondent has stated that she is divorced from the deceased employee through proceedings in O.P. No.19 of 1997, subsequently she was remarried, and secured employment in the government services, and also receiving a government pension. Furthermore, the 4^th respondent’s counsel has stated that 4^th respondent has no objection to grant all pensionary benefits of the deceased employee to the petitioner.

¶36

There is no controversy between the petitioner and the 4^th respondent regarding the payment of pensionary benefits or compassionate employment and the second marriage was contracted with the petitioner subsequent to the divorce granted by the competent Civil Court in O.P. No. 19 of 1997, hence it doesn’t contravene the Rules 3 and 25 of A.P. Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964.

¶37

¶38

Therefore, the present Writ Petition is disposed by directing the respondent authorities to release all pension related benefits to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Additionally, the petitioner is directed to submit an application for compassionate employment for one of her sons, which may be considered by the respondents in accordance with the law.

¶39

As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶40

__________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶41

Date: 17.09.2026 Harin

¶42

¶43

143

¶44

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

¶45

W.P.No.35339 of 2022

¶46

Date: 17-09-2026

¶47

Harin

Satupati Chandra Kala v. The Acharya N.G Ranga Agricultural University

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satupati Chandra Kala v. The Acharya N.G Ranga Agricultural University

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