Allowed

Coal Mines Providents Fund Organization, v. P.L. Prasanna Kumar

Telangana HC14 Mar 2012WA/507/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ appeal filed by the Coal Mines Provident Fund Organisation to set aside the order of the learned Single Judge in a related writ petition concerning career progression benefits for employees absent due to industrial action.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the orders dated 29-04-2010; dismissed the supporting writ application; posted writ petition for hearing.

Coal Mines Providents Fund Organization… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH And THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR

¶2

WRIT APPEAL No.507 of 2010

¶3

DT.14-03-2012

¶4

Between: Coal Mines Provident Fund Organisation Rep by its Commissioiner, Jagjivan Nagar, Dhanbad, Jhanrkhand-8260 14 & another

¶5

… Appellants

¶6

And

¶7

Sri P.L.Prasanna Kumar s/o. Someswar Rao, Aged about 48 years, UDC, Regional Office, CMPFO, Godavarikhani, Karimnagar District and another.

¶8

… Respondents

¶9

Counsel for the Appellant: Sri Srinivas Emani.

¶10

Counsel for respondent: Sri The Court made the following Judgment:

¶11

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH And THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR

¶12

WRIT APPEAL No.507 of 2010

¶13

JUDGMENT: Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah)

¶14

The appellants viz., the Coal Mines Provident Fund Organization represented by its Commissioner as well as Regional Commissioner filed this appeal against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.M.P.No.19894 of 2009 in W.P.No.15147 of 2010 dated 29-04-2010.

¶15

The main prayer sought for in the writ petition and the interim prayer is one and the same. The respondents 1 and 2 filed the Writ Petition with the following prayer:

¶16

“To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction or order declaring the action of the respondents in not extending the benefits to the petitioners on par with other employees of the Coal Mines Provident Fund Organisation as per the orders passed by the Coal Mines Provident Fund Organisation as per the order passed by the Govt. of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pension (Dept. of Personnel & Training) in Memorandum No.35034/1/97-Estt.(D), dated 9.8.1999 and the consequential order under Career Progression Scheme vide Office Order No.136 of 2007, dated 14-08-2007 passed by the respondents with all consequential benefits thereon as eligible by the petitioners from 25-07-2007 and 30-07-2007 respectively as arbitrary and illegal.”

¶17

It is the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants that if the writ petitioners/respondents are found guilty for their illegal strike and absent for duties for a period of 90 days there will be break in service, and in such case, they would not have completed 12 years of service, and therefore, they are not entitled for Assured Career Progression Scheme.

¶18

This Court by order dated 16-07-2010 in W.A.M.P.No.1196 of 2010 suspended the order passed by the learned Single. The writ petitioners/respondents filed W.V.M.P.No.2458 of 2010 seeking to vacate the said interim orders.

¶19

Insofar as the pendency of the enquiry is concerned, the delay is attributed by each against the other. Therefore, we are not inclined to express any opinion with regard to the delay in conducting of enquiry. However, we are of the prima facie opinion that as the Career Progression Scheme shall be subject to the Rules governing the normal promotion, such cases shall therefore be regulated under the provisions of relevant C.C.S (C.C.A) Rules 1965 and instructions there-under. Unless the writ petitioners succeed in the main writ petition, they are not entitled for any interim relief.

¶20

Accordingly, we allow the Writ Appeal and set aside the orders dated 29-04-2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.M.P.No.19894 of 2009 in W.P.No.15147 of 2010. Consequently, WVMP.No.2458 of 2010 filed by the respondents herein is dismissed. However, the writ petition be posted for hearing before the learned Single Judge after four weeks. No costs.

¶21

______________ V. ESWARAIAH,J

¶22

_______________ K.G.SHANKAR,J

¶23

DT.14-03-2012 grk

Coal Mines Providents Fund Organization, v. P.L. Prasanna Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Coal Mines Providents Fund Organization, v. P.L. Prasanna Kumar

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

The Commissioner / Director of Collegiate Education, Vs Smt. K. Naga Rani

Ayesha Begum, Vs The District Educational Officer

K.Jitender Reddy, Vs The Superintending Engineer, Operation

S.Durgaiah, S/o Venkata Swamy, Vs The Superintending Engineer

Bhookya Ravinder Vs A.P. Northern Powet Distribution Company Ltd.

Ajju krishna Vs a.P.Northern Power Distribution company Ltd.