Disposed

Sangani Krishna Murthy, v. Managing Director

Telangana HC10 Aug 2004WP/11540/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, drivers retired on medical invalidation, sought a writ directing implementation of a notification granting them benefits under amended service regulations. The Court, at the admission stage, directed the Corporation to implement the regulations once Government approval is obtained.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent Corporation to implement amended regulations for medically unfit retired drivers after obtaining Government approval.

Sangani Krishna Murthy, Vs Managing Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2004)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO : 11540 of 2004

¶7

Between:

¶8

1.Sangani Krishna Murthy, S/o. Veerajju, Hindu,

¶9

3/183, Morampudi, Rajahmundry, E.G. District.

¶10

2.Jeeri Rambabu - E 55185, S/o. Hanumantha Rao, Hindu, D.No.8623-6, V.L. Puram, Rajahmundry, E.G. District. 3.Pilli Veerraju - E 64684, S/o. Appalaswamy, Hindu, D.No.87-27-6, V.L. Puram, Rajahmundry, E.G. District. 4.Endukurri Anjaneya Raju -E 110306 S/o. Tirupathi Raju,

¶11

Hindu, D.No.4-141, Dwarapudi, Mandapeta Mandal, E.G. District. 5.Syed Abdul Rasheed E - 68965 S/o. Syed Makdum, Muslim, D.No.44-6-28, Madam Singhpeta, Rajahmundry, E.G. District. 6.Gummala Veerraju E - 92270, S/o. Padma Raju, Hindu, D.No.3-254, Katheru, Konthamuru Road, Rajahmundry Rural, E.G. District.

¶12

7.Addanki Narayana Rao, S/o. Ammiraju, Hindu, D.No.7-7-18, T. Nagar, Ranganchari Road, E.G. District. 8.Vanteddu Suryachandra Rao, S/o. Satyanarayana Murthy,

¶13

Hindu, D.No.15-176, Gollapeta, Dowlaiswaram, E.G. District. 9.Mulaka Appa Rao - 88415, S/o. Durgayya, Hindu, D.No.26-7-4, Kambalapeta, Rajahmundry, E.G. District.

¶14

..... PETITIONERS

¶15

AND

¶16

1 Managing Director, A.P.S.R.T.C., Musheerabad, Hyderabad.

¶17

2 Divisional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Rajahmundry, E.G. District.

¶18

3 Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Rajahmundry, E.G. District.

¶19

.....RESPONDENTS

¶20

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the

¶21

circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents in not implementing the benefits given under the Notification No.P.Dis.14/2003, dt. 8.10.2003 to the Petitioners as illegal, null and void and violation of Art. 21 of Constitution of India and for a Consequential order direct the respondents to implement the benefits given under Notification to the Petitioners who retired from service under the category of Medical Unit category

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.CH.DHANAMJAYA

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents: MR.Y.VIVEKANANDA SWAMY

¶24

The Court at the admission stage made the following : ORDER:

¶25

The petitioners are contending that they worked as drivers in the respondent – Corporation and they were made to retire from service on the ground of medical invalidation. The petitioners contend that the respondent – Corporation through the Notification No.P.Dis-14/2003, dated 8.10.2003 accorded approval for amendment of the Regulations through Regulation No.6A(5) of APSRTC Employees (Service) Regulations 1964, providing for better benefits to the medically unfit drivers.

¶26

The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that after approval made by the respondent – Corporation, it was sent to the Government for according permission for implementation of the amended Regulation No.6A (5) of APSRTC Employees (Service) Regulations 1964 and immediately after receiving the approval from the Government, it will be implemented.

¶27

In the light of the submissions made by both parties, the respondent – Corporation is directed to implement the said amended regulations to the petitioners who retired on medical invalidation, after getting approval from the Government for the said amendment.

¶28

The Writ petition is accordingly disposed of at the admission stage.

¶29

10^th AUGUST 2004

BSS/SVS

SPECIAL OFFICER

// TRUE COPY //

SECTION OFFICER