P. Padmanabham Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

P. Padmanabham Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of directing respondent Nos.1 & 2 to consider the petitioner's representations dated 06.07.2020 and 16.04.2022 (counting of ex-serviceman/defence service for pension and action-taken report on the application dated 06.07.2020), taking into account the Director, School Education's letter dated 22.09.2021, in accordance with the applicable procedure within a stipulated period, and to communicate the decision to the petitioner; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents' procrastination/inaction, under the guise of correspondence, in considering the petitioner's claim for counting of ex-serviceman (defence) service for pension calculation despite the Union of India Office Memorandum No.28/20/2004-P&P(B) dated 11.06.2020 is illegal, arbitrary, unfair, unjust and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. +2 more

Court's answer

The Court took into consideration that the contents of Lr.No.867/SER.IV-1/2020 dated 22.09.2021 addressed by the Director, School Education, Telangana State, Hyderabad to the Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Telangana Secretariat had not been acted upon by the 1st respondent till the date of the order.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of directing respondent Nos.1 & 2 to consider the petitioner's representations dated 06.07.2020 and 16.04.2022 - wherein he sought counting of his ex-serviceman (defence) service for pension and furnishing of the action-taken report on his application dated 06.07.2020 - taking into account the specific letter dated 22.09.2021 of the Director, School Education, Telangana State, Hyderabad, in accordance with the applicable procedure within a stipulated period (the period itself is illegible in the damaged record), and to communicate the decision on the representations to the petitioner. The Court did not adjudicate the petitioner's substantive entitlement under the Office Memorandum.

Key takeaways

There shall be no order as to costs.ratio¶118
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.ratio¶92

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Telangana High Court (Surepalli Nanda, J.), order dated 01.08.2025 in W.P. No.25503 of 2022 - P. Padmanabham, an ex-serviceman (NK, Arty-Surveyor; voluntary retirement 01.03.2003) selected in DSC-2008 under the ex-servicemen quota as Language Pandit (Hindi) and joined in ZPHS Korpote on 19.10.2009 under CPS (NPS), sought counting of his defence service for pension under the old pension scheme in terms of Union of India OM No.28/20/2004-P&P(B) dated 11.06.2020, alleging procrastination by the School Education authorities despite his representations dated 06.07.2020 and 16.04.2022 and despite the Director, School Education's letter Lr.No.867/SER.IV-1/2020 dated 22.09.2021 (referencing G.O.Ms.No.95 dated 03.04.2012 and Sub-Rule 15 under FR.19) remaining unacted upon by the 1st respondent. Without deciding substantive entitlement, the Court disposed of the petition directing respondent Nos.1 & 2 to consider both representations and the action-taken report, taking into account the letter dated 22.09.2021, in accordance with the applicable procedure within a stipulated period (period illegible in the record), and to communicate the decision; no costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

.;

t

t

I

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA-ATHYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

132s21

FRIDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

I

WRIT PETITIO N NO: 25 503 0F 2022

Between:

P. Padmanabham. S/o p Ganapathi_ Rao, aged about 54 years, Lanouaoe 33135'.J5i?'J"n^{ow work in g it- i,:p b :' l;,i,',iil,iiii,'s;; J#$"ffiX} ;;:i

I

...PETITIONER

AND

1 The State of Telanoana. r gept , secretariat, niroeraojfi-'^{by its Principal secretary'school Education} 2 3 +i:8ffi,',:?t?',::Xffi :f 3?,?#'itfd5;SlJ,..lii.oi',o,o

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ order or orders more in the nature of writ of Mandamus declare the impugned action of procrastination of the respondents under the guise of correspondence to consider the petitioners craim for counting of exserviceman service (defense service) for pension calculation at the time of his retirement in spite of specific instructions given by the Union of lndia in its Office Memorandum No 28r2or20o4-pand p(B) dt-11to6t2o2o is iregar, arbitrary, unfair, unjust and vioration of Articres 14 0f the constitution of rndia and consequenry declare that as the petitioner has been appointed on 1gt10r2o0g (between the periorl 0110412004 and 28t1)l2oog) for this reason his ex-servicemen service is entitled to count for pension carcuration at the time of his retirement in terms of the above office Memorandum dt.1 1106/2020 with a, conseguentiar benefits

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

Petition under^{Section151 CPCprayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed^{in support of the petition,the High Courtmaybe pleasedto} directtherespondentstoconsiderthegrievanceofthepetitionerforcountinghis defense service to^{the old pension schemeby passing orders on his} representation dl.16tO4l2O22^{pending disposalof the above writ petition}

Counsel for the^{Petitioner:SRl.P. UGENDER REDDY}

Counsel for the^{Respondents:AGP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION}

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

l I l I I I I I I I i I I i II I I i i i t I i

i t I

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTTCE SUREPALLI NANDA

wRIT PETITION No .2 s5030F 2022

ORDER:

Heard Sri p.Ugender Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Assista nt Government pteader for School Education appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. Th iti ner a ro h th c rt ee tn r er

as under:

"...to issue a Writ Order or orders more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the impugned action of procrastination of the respondents under the guise of correspondence to consider the petitioners claim for counting of ex-serviceman service (defense service) for pension calculation at the time of retirement in spite of specific instructions given by the Union of India in its Office Memorandum No.2B/20/20O4_p&p(B) dt.lI/0612020 is illegal, arbitrary, unfair, unjust and violation oF Articles 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently declare that as the petitioner has been appointed on t9/lO/2OOg (between the period 0l/04/2004 and ZB/tO/2C09) for this reason his exservicemen service is entiUed to count for pension calculation at the time of his retirement in terms of the

)

j
'.t'r:
.:l

2

SN, J

above Office Memorandum dt.ll/06/2020 with all consequential benefits and to pass..."

The case of the oetitioner in brief as per the averments made in the affidavit filed bv the oetitioner in suDoort of t e Dresent Writ Petition is as under:-

It is specific case of the petitioner that the action of procrastination of the respondents under the guise of correspondence to consider the petitioners claim for counting of ex-serviceman service (defense service) for pension calculation at the time of petitioner's retirement in spite of specific instructions given by the Union of India in its Office Memorandum No.28/20/2OO4-P&P(B) dt.Lt/06/2020 is illegat, arbitrary, unfair, unjust and violation of Articles 14 of the Constitution of india and as the petitioner had been appointed on t9/LO/2009 (between the period OL/04/ZOO4 and 28/L0/2009) for this reason his ex-servicemen service is entitled to be counted for pension calculation at the time of his retirement in terms of the above Office Memorandum dt.ll/06/2020 with all consequential benefits. Aggrieved by the same, the present Writ Petition is filed.

SN, J

I I I I { l I i I I I I i

I I Ii I, jI

3

./,:/

4 P RUS E D THE RECORD.

A T e r.N 7 T V. 2 o d ted 22 9 o21 a dress bv th Dire r, Sch ol Educatio N,T elanqa a s ate, Hvder ba /ReSDondent No.2 to the Secretarv to OV rn en s o IE ca on De rt en T an an ecr arl t d ra d Re on n N R e a ed

h reu nder: -

I am to submit that, the District Educational Officer, Sangareddy District vide referenc" .itJ-nui stated that the HM, Z?HS, Kothtapur(M), Sanga^- ReOay (M), Sangareddy District nas suOmittJ ihat sri pujari Padmanabham worked in Defence Service ai armed forces NK (Arty-Surveyor) w.e.f. 2t.03.$il. iJ nu. tut"n voluntary retirement on 01.03.2003. Later, he was selected in DSC-2008 under Ex_seruii"r"n- qrota as Lp Hindi and joined in ZpHS Korpote on rS.iO.2oO9 in CpS (NPS) Govt of Service or State Service is eligible for previous service tor pension calculation at- the time of retirement.

Further I submit that the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.95, dated 03.04.20t2 nuru ii*uO following orders. The operative portion of the orders iie as fottows:

"6. Accordingly to Sub_Rule 15 under FR.19

Re-employed pensioners who are in receipt of superannuation or retiring pensions, and are re_employed temp_orarily for specific periods should not be given the benefit of revised scales of pay. Their piy *O pension should not together exceed the pay tast Oiawn by them while in service. This rule will not however, apply to persons/ who retired on compensation or invalid pension before they attained the age of 58 years as unfit for

4

SN, J

service in a particular post of department and Ex-lvlilitary Personnel who are subsequently re-employed on permanent footing on a difFerent post or department...."

In view of the above, I request the Government to issue further necessary orders in the matter please.

B. The reDresentatio n of the Detitioner, dated 15 .o4.2022 addre ed to the 3"d resDondent is racted here u nder: -

"It is submitted that I, P. padmanabham, Ex-Service Soldier, Language Teacher Hindi. I stated as the above subject requested to the District Education Officer to take my army service into the consideration for the pension.

I, therefore, requested you sir kindly furnish the action taken report of my application, dated 06.O7.2020,

DISCUS ION AND CON CLUSION:-

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner made a detailed representation, dated 06.07.2O2O seeking counting of exserviceman service (defence service) for calcutating the pension under the old pension scheme by passing appropriate orders on petitioner,s representation, dated 06.07.2O2O addressed to the Gazetted Headmaster, ZPHS, Kothlapur, Sangareddy and respondent No.3, and that the petitioner had submitted another representation, dated L6.O4.2O22 to the respondent No.3, seeking the status

5

! i j

SN, J

.,/

report of the action taken on the representation, dated 06.07.2O2O, however, the respondents had not taken any action on both the representations, dated 06.07.202O and L6.O4.2O22 as on date, which had been forwarded by Gazetted Headmaster, z:pH|st Kothtapur, Sangareddy to respondent No.3 vide Lr.No.636/ZpHS/K,pUR/2O2O, dated 06.O7.2O2O and the same had been forwarded by the respondent No.3 to the respondent No,2, vide Lr.No.2943 / 82/ 2O2O, dated O4.O9.2O2O. which in turn had been forwarded to the respondent No.1 vide Lr.No.867lSER-IV- 1/2020, dated 22.O9.202J-. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present Writ petition.

6 ru e dic es a ide tter da 2 .09 o2 ad s db th Di r 5c ool du ti T n a t ra he ecr a to ver m t ch E u onD n Tel n na re ta H er ad th es of e eti on h tn or oun n e an rvr ef nc s cal ti of st h be bv the resDondent No. 2to res nd ntNo.1 a nd rthera

6

l i I t I II I

SN, J

sDecific uest was made to examine the case of the Detitioner as Der G.O.Ms.N o.95, dated O3.O4 .2O12 with reference to Sub-Rule 15 under FR.19. but however thou oh the said letter. dated 22.O9.202L had been forwa rded bv the Director, School Education. Telanqana der the S r to Gov r ent Sch Educa tion Deoartm ent, Telanoa na Secretariat. Hvdera bad wav back 22.O9.2O2L so far, no st ps had been initiated to consider the orievance of the D titioner i.e., countinq itioner' rvtce se servr for cal nun r the ol ron s h b a ADDTOD iate orders on oetitione r's reoresenta tion, dated 06.07O2O and 15. 04.2022.

Learn d Assistant Government Pleader for School Education on behalf of the resDondents submits that the resDo dents mav be directe d to consider the reo uest of the oetition r made vide representa tions, ated o6.07.2020 nd 15. o4.2022 within a reasonable oeriod in acco dance to law.

I //

7

SN, J

8 s a ea n o al of th ti n d s ot s e e su on a e the I a rned Assis tan Govern me t Pleader for Sch ol Educa ron n half oft e oondents.

9 Takinql nto nsider tton:a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.

b) The submissions made by the tearned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and tearned Assistant Government pleader for School Education on behalf of the respondents.

c) The representation of the petitioner, dated L6.O4.2O22 addressed to the 3.d respondent pending considerataon with the respondent herein till as on date.

d) The contents of the Lr.No.B67lSET/IV_L/ZO2O, dated 22,09.2021 addressed by the Director, Schoot Education, Telangana State, Hyderabad to the Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Telangana Secretariat (referred to and extracted above) having not been acted upon by the 1.t respondent till as on date.

=-<

8

I I I I l ! i I I I I I

SN, J

The Writ Petition is d isoosed of directin the resDonde nt Nos.1 & 2 to consider the re uest of the roner ut-fo VI eti r s resen ns dat d 06.07.2020 and 16. o4.2022 add ressedtoth 3,.d resDondent herein, whereun der the Detition er souo tto ke ron r' -serv man ervr fen rvt into consid ration for the DU rDOSe of Dension a nd to turn ish the reDort Dertaininq to action taken on petition er's ao^pl ication, dated 06.o7.2020 add ress dto the 3rd resoondent seeki no count tn of the Detitio er's ex-s rvtceman servtce ( Defence Service ) for Denston calc Iation d v taktn tnto consid eratron th e sⁿ ecific ru da 2.O9.2 1 addr sed e Dir School Education, Telanoana State. Hvderaba i.e., the 2nd

resDondent t the Secretarv o Government, School

Edu tion Deoart ent, Telanoan Secreta riat 1.e., the 1st resoo ndent ( referred to and extracte d above ), in

rd tol ln ormr with rt ct le fna sti idin o unl ers n !he n r ithi era of ur o4 ksf m e eof fco thi rd and dul m nt e

9

SN, J

the decis !on on the sai oetitioner's reDre e ti n a e 07. o o n o 2 e ti n r HowEVer, thereshaI be no order as to co

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ

Petition, shall stand closed.

SD/-L. VIJAYA LAXMI AS ISTANT REGISTRAR

{'r

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

I

I

1 +[: l'Jffi,lr1*:creta ry, Schoot Ed ucation Dept., secreta riat, 2? The The District Diiector Ed of u School Education, Govt.of T.S.Hvderabad.cationa I Offi;;r. Sa;;;;;;r; ;li;;'' " 4 onecc to sRt p UGFNnER'RED6Vlnii,#"iJ"bpucf 5 rwo ccs to Gp FoR scHoo_L E-D-u-cAiibri'i;gh"a;ur*or the state of Telangana^{at Hyderabad} tOUT]^{----'r'|'Ivrr'r rrerr\JL}

1. Two CD Copies

BM

BS -6a

I

CG TODAY

,

I

t

I l

I l

HIGH^COURT

DATED:01^10812025

ORDER

'ir
d
r. (t0 ?16 C.
t -i_, ,.
. -fI
t<br>

WP.No.2S503^ot2022

t

DISPOSING^{OF THE WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT^COSTS

^(eh
nLQY
W^'^,b
.q\ <br>

I

Issues for consideration

3 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the respondents' procrastination/inaction, under the guise of correspondence, in considering the petitioner's claim for counting of ex-serviceman (defence) service for pension calculation despite the Union of India Office Memorandum No.28/20/2004-P&P(B) dated 11.06.2020 is illegal, arbitrary, unfair, unjust and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.¶40
The court held
The Court took into consideration that the contents of Lr.No.867/SER.IV-1/2020 dated 22.09.2021 addressed by the Director, School Education, Telangana State, Hyderabad to the Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Telangana Secretariat had not been acted upon by the 1st respondent till the date of the order.ratio¶80
2.
Whether, having been appointed on 19.10.2009 (i.e., between 01.04.2004 and 28.10.2009), the petitioner's ex-servicemen service is entitled to be counted for pension calculation at the time of his retirement in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 11.06.2020, with consequential benefits.¶40
3.
Whether the respondents should be directed to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representations dated 06.07.2020 and 16.04.2022 (counting of defence service for pension and action-taken report) within a reasonable period in accordance with law.¶72
The court held
The writ petition is disposed of directing respondent Nos.1 & 2 to consider the petitioner's representations dated 06.07.2020 and 16.04.2022 - wherein he sought counting of his ex-serviceman (defence) service for pension and furnishing of the action-taken report on his application dated 06.07.2020 - taking into account the specific letter dated 22.09.2021 of the Director, School Education, Telangana State, Hyderabad, in accordance with the applicable procedure within a stipulated period (the period itself is illegible in the damaged record), and to communicate the decision on the representations to the petitioner. The Court did not adjudicate the petitioner's substantive entitlement under the Office Memorandum.ratio¶85

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
No formal order impugned; the challenge is to the respondents' administrative inaction - procrastination under the guise of correspondence in failing to consider the petitioner's claim for counting of ex-serviceman (defence) service for pension calculation despite Union of India Office Memorandum No.28/20/2004-P&P(B) dated 11.06.2020.¶19
Prior proceeding
Petitioner's representation dated 06.07.2020 to the Gazetted Headmaster, ZPHS, Kothlapur, Sangareddy seeking counting of his ex-serviceman (defence) service for pension; no action taken on it or on the later representation dated 16.04.2022.¶66
Prior proceeding
Forwarding chain of the 06.07.2020 representation: Gazetted Headmaster, ZPHS Kothlapur to respondent No.3 vide Lr.No.636/ZPHS/KPUR/2020 dated 06.07.2020; respondent No.3 to respondent No.2 vide Lr.No.2943/82/2020 dated 04.09.2020; respondent No.2 to respondent No.1 vide Lr.No.867/SER.IV-1/2020 dated 22.09.2021.¶66
Prior proceeding
Letter Lr.No.867/SER.IV-1/2020 dated 22.09.2021 from the Director, School Education, Telangana State, Hyderabad (Respondent No.2) to the Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Telangana Secretariat (Respondent No.1), forwarding the DEO Sangareddy's report and the extract of G.O.Ms.No.95 dated 03.04.2012 regarding Sub-Rule 15 under FR.19 and requesting further orders; not acted upon by Respondent No.1.¶80
Prior proceeding
Petitioner's representation dated 15/16.04.2022 (printed both ways in the record) addressed to respondent No.3 seeking the action-taken report on his application dated 06.07.2020; pending consideration.¶59
Prior proceeding
Report of the District Educational Officer, Sangareddy (via HM, ZPHS Kothlapur) that petitioner Pujari Padmanabham served in the Defence Service (armed forces) as NK (Arty-Surveyor), took voluntary retirement on 01.03.2003, was selected in DSC-2008 under the ex-servicemen quota as LP Hindi and joined ZPHS Korpote on 19.10.2009 under CPS (NPS), raising whether previous service is eligible for pension calculation.¶49