Allowed

N.Shanmugam, v. The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

Telangana HC8 Oct 2015WP/32685/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Division Bench directed respondents to treat a petitioner as continuing in service for pensionary benefits, relying on a previous mandate in W.P. No. 27085 of 2015, and ordered the release of retiral benefits calculated up to superannuation date, imposing a penalty of stoppage of two increments.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to consider petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders treating him as in service for pension calculation and release benefits within eight weeks.

N.Shanmugam, Vs The Andhra Pradesh State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2015)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO W.P.No.32685 of 2015

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This writ petition is filed seeking to direct the respondents to release all the service and retiral benefits of the petitioner by treating him to be in service upto the date of his superannuation i.e., 31.10.2007.

¶4

The petitioner worked as Conductor in the respondent-Corporation. While in service, alleging certain irregularities, he was removed from service. Challenging the said removal order, he filed I.D.No.122 of 2002 before the Tribunal, which was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, he filed W.P.No.7769 of 2004 and the same was also dismissed vide order dated 19.08.2005. Thereafter, he filed W.A.No.1839 of 2005. A Division Bench of this Court, while setting aside the removal order, directed the respondentCorporation to reinstate the petitioner into service, if not already retired forthwith, and imposed the punishment of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect vide order dated 28.07.2009.

¶5

The version of the petitioner is that while the writ appeal was pending before the Division Bench, he attained the age of superannuation and in view

¶6

of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court, he is entitled to all the benefits as if he was in service duly giving effect to the penalty imposed by the Division Bench in W.A.No.1839 of 2005. Hence, he made representation dated 26.02.2015 to respondents 2 and 3 to release his retiral and pensionary benefits.

¶7

In similar circumstances, this Court in W.P.No.27085, dated 26.08.2015, directed the respondents to treat the petitioner therein as continuing in service in view of the setting aside the order of his removal from service, and the same was directed to be taken into account for reckoning his pensionary benefits, after giving effect to the substituted punishment of withholding of two increments, which shall start from the date of his earlier punishment and release the service and retiral benefits by calculating the same upto the date of his superannuation.

¶8

In view of the above, the respondents are directed to consider the representation dated 26.02.2015 made by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in terms of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.27085 of 2015 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶9

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall

¶10

stand closed.

¶11

JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO

¶12

8^th October, 2015 rkk

N.Shanmugam, v. The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Shanmugam, v. The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Narasimha Murthy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

N. Sudarshan, Vs T.S.R.T.C., rep. by its Executive Director

Kota Jagadeeswara Rao, S/o. Kota Appa Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Allam Leelavathi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

B. Suvarnamma, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary

K.Rajulu Vs State of Telangana Rep. by its Principal Secretary