THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI
WRIT PETITION (TR) NO.6041 OF 2017
ORDER
The present Writ Petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in not paying minimum time scale of pay attached to the post of Typist to the petitioner even though she is working continuously for more than 26 years, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.
2. It is submitted that the petitioner has been appointed as a Typist on NMR basis with effect from 18.12.1989 and since then, she has been discharging her duties as such without any complaint from any quarter. It is submitted that the petitioner had submitted a representation to the respondents to regularise her services, but the respondents, instead of regularising her services, had terminated her services and therefore, she had approached the A.P. Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A.No.6132 of 1995. It is submitted that initially, the Tribunal had granted interim order to continue the services of the petitioner and ultimately by order dt.27.02.2001, the OA was disposed of directing the respondents to W.P. (TR) No.6041 of 2017 2 regularise the services of the petitioner if she fulfils the conditions laid down in G.O.Ms.No.212 F&P (PC.III) Department, dt.22.04.1994 irrespective of whether the petitioner completed 5 years as on the cut-off date mentioned in the G.O. and without insisting on existence of a vacancy. It is submitted that though the petitioner was continued in service thereafter, she is being paid lesser pay and therefore, the present Writ Petition is filed. In support of her contention that she is eligible for the minimum time scale of pay attached to the post, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of this High Court dt.30.08.2011 in W.P.No.24130 of 2011 and batch, wherein the principle of equal pay for equal work was applied and the Government was directed to make payment of the minimum time scale of pay attached to the post. The petitioner is seeking similar relief in this Writ Petition.
3. Learned Government Pleader for Services-II submitted that the petitioner has not made any representation to the respondents and when such representation is made, the respondents would consider the same in accordance with law.
W.P. (TR) No.6041 of 2017 3
4. Leaned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Santhapur Satyanarayana, sought liberty from this Court to make a representation to the respondents and further prayed that the respondents may be directed to consider the said representation in the light of the above cited judgment and pass appropriate orders thereon extending minimum time scale of pay attached to the Typist post to the petitioner.
5. In view of the above submissions, the petitioner is given liberty to make a representation to the respondents within a period of ten (10) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such representation being made, the respondents shall consider the same and extend the benefit of minimum time scale of pay attached to the post of Typist to the petitioner in accordance with rules and also the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and others Vs. Jagjit Singh and others1. The respondents shall pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of the representation from the petitioner.
1 (2017) 1 SCC 148 W.P. (TR) No.6041 of 2017 4
6. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.
7. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI Date: 15.09.2022 Svv