Allowed

Smt. Neeli Venkata Lakshmi Saraswathi Devi, v. The Govt. of a.P.,rep.by its Secretary, Education Dept.

Telangana HC10 Aug 2004WP/14031/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition by a Grade-II Hindi Pandit sought a declaration that the respondents illegally denied her Grade-I scale benefits under G.O.Rt.No.644 dated 7-12-2000 and challenged a cut-off date. The High Court, admitting the petition, directed the Zilla Parishad to implement the Government Order in the petitioner's favor upon verifying her qualifications.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 4th respondent (Chief Executive officer, Zilla Parishad, Guntur Dist.) to implement G.O.Rt.No.644 dated 7.12.2000 in the petitioner's favor, subject to verification of mandatory quali

Smt. Neeli Venkata Lakshmi Saraswathi… — 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 : 14031 of 2004

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt. Neeli Venkata Lakshmi Saraswathi Devi, W/o.P.V.Koteswara Rao, Grade-II, Hindi Pandit,R/o.Mutyamsettipet, Dayananda Street, Tenali,Guntur Dist.

¶9

..... PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1.The Govt. of A.P.,rep.by its Secretary, Education Dept.,

¶12

Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2.The Commissioner and Director of School Education, Govt. of

¶13

A.P.Hyderabad. 3.The Dist.Educational officer, Guntur Dist. 4.The Chief Executive officer, Zilla Parishad, Guntur Dist.

¶14

.....RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not extending the benefit of G.O.Rt.No.771, Education (Ser.III) Department, dt.26.5.1995 and G.O.Rt.No.644, Education (Ser.III) Department, Dt.7.12.2000 to the petitioner herein as illegal, arbitrary, improper, unjust and contrary to law and further declare that the petitioner is entitled for Grade-I Hindi pandit (Language pandits) time scale as was given to the individuals in Krishna Dist. as per G.O.Rt.No.771, Education (Ser.III) Dept. dt. 26-51995 and G.O.Rt.No.644, Education (ser.III) Department, dt.7-12-2000 with all consequential benefits including monetary, seniority and further declare that cut off date i.e., 11-3-1982 in G.O.Ms.No.330, Education Dept., dt.10-8-1983 as illegal,

¶16

arbitrary, improper, unjust and contrary to law. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.B.V.RAM NARESH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3: GP FOR EDUCATION

¶17

The Court at the admission stage made the following :

¶18

ORDER:

¶19

The petitioner is working as Grade-II Hindi Pandit in Zilla Parishad High School, T.Sundur, Tenali Mandal of Guntur District. The petitioner claims that she acquired the qualifications, which are required to be possessed for Grade-I Hindi Pandit and therefore, she is entitled to the benefit of getting the scale of Grade-I Hindi Pandit by virtue of G.O.Rt.No.644, Education (Ser.III) Department, dated 7.12.2000. The petitioner therefore, approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to implement G.O.Rt.No.644 in favour of the petitioner and extend the benefit of scale of Grade-I Hindi Pandit from the date of her acquiring requisite qualification.

¶20

In the light of the terms of G.O.Rt.No.644, the petitioner who acquired the qualifications required for Grade-I Hindi Pandit, is entitled to get the scale of Grade-I Hindi Pandit from the date of acquiring the said qualification or from the date of her appointment, which ever is later.

¶21

The 4^th respondent, therefore, is directed to implement the said G.O.Rt.No.644 in favour of the petitioner for the post of Grade-I Hindi Pandit, after satisfying that she possessed the requisite qualification required for Grade-I Hindi Pandit and pass appropriate orders as per existing Rules.

¶22

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

¶23

10^th AUGUST 2004

SPECIAL OFFICER

BSS/SVS

// TRUE COPY //

SECTION OFFICER

1.The Secretary, Govt. of A.P., Education Dept.,

¶30

Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2.The Commissioner and Director of School Education, Govt. of

¶31

A.P. Hyderabad. 3.The District Educational officer, Guntur Dist. 4.The Chief Executive officer, Zilla Parishad, Guntur Dist.

¶32

5. 2CCs to G.P. for Education, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT)

¶33

6.2CD copies

¶34

Form-NIC-OGS/WP{JA}

Smt. Neeli Venkata Lakshmi Saraswathi Devi, v. The Govt. of a.P.,rep.by its Secretary, Education Dept.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Neeli Venkata Lakshmi Saraswathi Devi, v. The Govt. of a.P.,rep.by its Secretary, Education Dept.

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

V.D. Prasad, E-368005, Clearner, Vs The Apsrtc rep by its Managing Director

S. Venkata Lakshmi, Vs The Secretary to Government

Smt. Prameela, Vs The Senior Regional Manager

Pathi Raviprasad, Vs The Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Limited

Sangani Krishna Murthy, Vs Managing Director

K.V. Ramanaiah, Vs The Commissioner