Disposed

Athiya Shahar Banu v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC3 Apr 2025WP/9991/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A retired office subordinate whose pension was sanctioned by letter dated 12.08.2024 but whose terminal benefits were withheld sought a mandamus for their release. The respondents cited dearth of funds but agreed to pay. The court disposed of the writ petition directing release within ten weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to release retirement benefits per Letter dated 12.08.2024 within ten weeks; no costs.

Athiya Shahar Banu Vs The State of Telangana — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³³⁰⁴ ]

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:9991 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Athiya Shahar Banu, Wo: Khaja Mumtajuddin, Age 61 years, Occ: Retired Ofiice Subordinate, R/o 13-92, Ramakrishna Talkies, Opp. Police Station, Nagarkumool, Nagarkurnool District

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Special Chief Secretary to Government, Finance Department, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar. State Secretariat, Hyderabad Telangana

¶12

The Director of Local Fund Audit, Telangana, Hyderabad

¶13

The Director of Treasuries, Telangana, Hyderabad

¶14

The Deputy Director of Treasuries, Nagarkurnool, Nagarkurnool District.

¶15

The District Audit Officer, State Audit, Nagarkurnool

¶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 especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that a) the action of the Respondents in not making^payment of terminal benefits to the Petitioner in pursuance of letter^proceedings Respondents in No.CEO.ZPINGW 173112024, dated 1210812024 is illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory, violating Article^'14, 16 and 300-A of the Constitution of lndia further declare that, the Respondents shall forthwith release all terminal benefits payable to the Petitioner including Death-cum-Retirement, Gratuity, Commutation of Pension, General Provident Fund amount arid encashment of Eamed Leave and Earned Leave amount and other benefits in^pursuance of his

¶18

-t';i5 ,7

¶19

retirement dated 30/06/2024 and the tetter in Lr.No.CEO.ZP1NGW173112O24, daled 1210812024 of the District Audit Officer, State Audit, Nagarkurnool c) the Respondents have no right or power to withhold the terminal benefits payable to the Petitioner after his retirement a).

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to forthwith release all the terminal benefits payable to the Petitioner in,pursuance of the Lr.No.CEO.ZPINGt</1 73112024, dated 12.08.2024 of the District Audit Officer, State Audit, Nagarkurnool including payment of General Provident Fund amount and encashment of Earned Leave and Earned Leave amount, pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SRINIVASA RAO MADIRAJU

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR FINANCE

¶24

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.2 and 5: GP FOR LOCAL AUDIT

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 and 4: GP FOR TREASURIES

¶26

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶27

¶28

T l

¶29

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR^RAO

¶30

WRIT PETITION No.9991 oF²⁰²⁵

¶31

ORDER

¶32

With the consent of both the^parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for disposal, at the admission stage.

¶33

Heard Mr. Srinivasa Rao Madiraju,^{Iearned counsel for the} petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Finance appearing for respondent No.1, learned Government Pleader for Local^Audit appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 5 and^{learned Government} Pleader for Treasuries appearing for respondent^{Nos.3 and 4.}

¶34

Learned counsel for the^petitioner submits that the^petitioner retired from service on 30.06.2024. Considering^{the pension} proposals, respondent No.5 sanctioned^pension to the^petitioner vide Letter dated 12.08.2024. However, till now,^{her retirement} benefits were not released by the^respondents.

¶35

Learned Government Pleader submits that due to^{dearth of} funds, the amounts could not be released to the^{petitioner, on time.} However, in^pursuance of Letter, dated^{12.08.2024, amountswill be} released to the beneficiaries.

¶36

Having regard to the above made^{submissions,this Writ} petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release

¶37

retirement benefits to the petitioner in pursuance of Letter No.CEOZP/NGK/1731/SP/2024, dated 12.08.2024, issued by respondent No.5, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of ten (10) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶38

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶39

SD/. P. PADMANABHA REDDY DEPUW REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

To,

r] ECTION OFFICER

1 The S_pecial Chief S-ecretary to Government, Finance Department, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar. State Secretariat, Hyderabad The Staie of Telangana, Telangana

¶44

2 The Director of Local Fund Audit, Telanqana. Hvderabad

¶45

3 The Director of Treasuries, Telangana, Hyderatiad

¶46

4 The Deputy Director of TreasurieS, Nagaikurnool, Naoarkurnool District. 5 The District Audit Officer, State Audit, Nagarkurnool^- 6 One CC to Sri Srinivasa Rao Madiraju, Advocate tOpUCl

¶47

7 Two CCs to GP for Finance, High Court for the Stdte of Tblangana, at

¶48

Hyderabad [OUT]

¶49

Two CC to The GP for Locat Audit, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad[OUT]

¶50

I Two CC to The GP for Treasuries, High Court for the State of Telangana, at

¶51

Hyderabad[OUT]

¶52

'10 Two CD Copies

TJ GJP

HIGH COURT

CC TODAY

DATED:0310412025

ORDER

E STA rE
1 o
v
q
10 [Pfl 2ffi |:I
c,
1^
':j)
.... -+ tl ..
-_ :*_-

¶59

WP.No.9991 o12025

¶60

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶61

WITHOUT COSTS

¶62

\9
ry )A

Athiya Shahar Banu v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Athiya Shahar Banu v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B.Emmanuel Vs The State of Telangana

V.Yellesha Vs The State of Telangana

M.Mallaiah Vs The-State of Telangana

Ch. Venkata Rama Rao Vs The State of Telangana

G. Surya Rao Vs The State of Telangana

P.Gopi Vs The State of Telangana and 2 Others