Pulipaka Sukuna Vs The Singareni Collieries Company Limited and 4others

¶1

t32s21

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 30177 OF 2 o22

¶7

Between:

¶8

Pulpaka Sukuna, W/o. Pulipaka Gattaiah, Age 50, Occ Coolie, R/o.e.No.72G. Pranahitha Colony, Shirke, Itlandamarri"Village and Mandal, l\ilancherial Disrtict. Telang ana. 504231

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The Singareni Col eries Company Limited, Rep. by its Chairman and lVlanaging Director, Singareni Bhava'n, Khairatabad, Hyd6rabad.

¶12

Ihu^General -^{[t/anager, The Singareni Collieries CompanyLimited,} Ramagundam Area, Peddapalli Districi, T.S

¶13

3 The Regional Commissioner, Coal Mines Provrdent Fund, Godavarikhani and Authority_under Coal lvlines Provident Fund Scheme, IVlillennium euarters, LB Colony, Opp. Bus-stand, Godavarikhani, Peddapa[i District T.S -505209,

¶14

4 Pulipaka Gattaiah, S/o. Peerarah Aged 60 years Occ retired SCCL employee, R/o. D-767, Hanuman Nagar Godavarikhani, peddapalli District. T.S

¶15

Yashoda, Aged_ 50 years _Occ House wife, Rto. D-767, Hanuman Nagar Godavarikhani, Peddapalli District. T.S

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of lVlandamus, by declaring the action of the Respondent No.^.l to 3 in not entering the name of the petitioner in service register of the 4th Respondent by considering the representatton of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, against the service rules, against the principles of natural justice and u n constitutiona I and consequently to direct the respondent No. 1 to 3 to enter the name of the petitioner in the service register of the 4th respondent as his wife by deleting the

¶18

name of the 5th respondent in the service register by c< nsrdering the petitioner representation daled 05 I 07 12022.

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed rn support of the petitlon, the High Crurt may be pleased to direct the responrJent No. 1 to 3 not to release the retirenent benefits of the 4th Respondent by considering the representation of the peti roner daled o5lo7l2o22 forthwith pending disposal of this write petition before thr:; Hon,ble court.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DT.CHALLA SRINIVASA F,EDDy

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: SRI p.SRl HARSHA REDDy, SC FOR SCCL

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

:1

¶25

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI^NANDA

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.30L77 0F 2022

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

Heard Sri Challa Srinivas Reddy. Iearned counsel appearing on behalf of the^{petitioner and} Sri P. Sri Harsha Reddy, learned Standing^Counselfor Singareni Collieries Company Limited appearing^on behalf of the respondent^Nos.1 and^2.

¶29

The Detitioner aooroach this Court see kino the

¶30

Draver as under:

¶31

"....to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, by declaring the action of the^Respondent No.1 to 3 in not entering the name of^the petitioner in service register of the 4th Respondent by considering the representation of^{the petitioner} as illegal, arbitrary, against the service^rules, against the principles of natural^{justice and} unconstitutional and consequently to direct^the respondent No.1 to 3 to enter the^{name of the} petitioner in the service register of^the 4th respondent as his wife by deleting^{the name of} the 5th respondent in the service^registerby considering the^petitioner's representation^dated 05 / 07 /2022 and^pass...."

¶32

--^{E:illffitftq!*l} :- i' r( .-^.-- -t::,;t

¶33

2

¶34

SN,J 'l^{.P No.301772022}

¶35

.'' :

¶36

'.:\

¶37

The case of the petitioner, in tlief, is that respondent Nos.1 to 3 are not considerin 3 petitioner's representation dated 05.07.2022 and not entr:-ing the name of the petltioner as the wife of 4th respondent. in the service record of 4Lr' respondent.

¶38

4, It i:; the specific case of the petitir: ner that the petitioner is the wife of 4th respondent and out of their wedlocl.:, l-he couple were blessed with one ;on by name Pulipaka Srikanth, aged 25 years and 4th respondent worked in the respondent Nos.1 to 3 Corporation as Tyndal, with Employee Code No.01181647 and on 30,i)6.2022, the 4th respon,Jent retired from service.

¶39

It is further case of the petitioner that ait er retirement the 4th respondent herein, the 4th respondent with malafide intention, entered the name of the 5th respc ndent as his wife in the service records of the 4th respondent by misleading the officials and the 4th responder t never took divorce from the petitioner herein and the g etitioner still remains legally wedded wife of the 4th respordent and the petitioner has legitimate right to enter her narne as wiFe in the service records of the 4th respondent hereir.

¶40

3

¶41

SN,J W.P-No.301.77 2O22

¶42

.i, ff,|fl!!ffiEr :1- :^t' 't-':8, .'.;.'...,'.../ -F-

¶43

It is further case of^{the petitioner that through} petitioner's representation dated 05-07 '2022^tothe 2nd respondent, the^{petitioner explained entire issue and} requested the 2nd respondent to^look into^{the matteroF the} 4th respondent, who is making attempt to^{transfer all the} retirement benefits to 5th respondent^{herein showingas wife} of 4th respondent instead of^{petitioner herein, however, the} representation was not considered^{by the 2nd respondent.} Hence, the^petitioner aggrieved^{by the same preferredthe} present writ petition.

¶44

Discu ion & ConcIusion

¶45

The learned counsel appearing^{on behalf of the} petitioner seeks a limited relief directing the 2nd respondent to consider the^petitioner's representation^{dated05.07.2022} in accordance to law within a^{stipulatedperiod.}

¶46

Learned standing counsel for Singareni^Collleries appearing on behalf of^{respondentNos.1 and 2 does not} dispute the said submission^{made by the learned counsel} appearing on behalf^{of the petitioner.}

¶47

4

¶48

5N,J \4.P.No.30177 2022

¶49

Takinq into consid eration:

¶50

(a) The aforesaid facts and circulstances of the case,

¶51

(h) The submissions made by 1:he learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petiti<rner and the learned standing counsel for Singareni Collieries Company Limited appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 ancl 2.

¶52

The Writ Petition is disposed of rlirecting the 2nd respondent herein to conduct inquiry into the issue as put-forth by the petitioner in her representation dated O5.O7.2022 addre:;sed to the 2"d respondent herein seeking to enter the name of the petitioner in service register of the 4th respondent and to provide the post retirement benefits of petitioner's husband i.e., 4th respondr:nt herein, by providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner as well as the 4th respondent herein and pass appropriate orders in accordan< e to law, in conformity with principles of natural ju:;tice, within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt

¶53

5

¶54

SN,J w .P .No .30177 2022

¶55

of a copy of this order and duly communicate the decision to the^petitioner herein on her representation dated O5.07.2022. However, there shall be^{no order}

¶56

as to costs.

¶57

Miscellaneous applications, if any,^pending shall^stand

closed.

I i J

To,

. GOW^{RI SHANKAR} SD/-A.H STANT^REGISTRAR //TRUE^COPY// SECTION^OFFICER