".....Issue An Order Or Direction ... vs 5
2023 Latest Caselaw 233 AP

                                                1




         THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

          WRIT PETITION (AT) Nos.895 and 889 of 2021

COMMON ORDER :

      Writ Petition (AT) No. 895 of 2021 is filed claiming the

following relief:


             ".....Issue an order or direction to declare the action of the
             respondents    in     rejecting     the      petitioner's     case   for

compassionate appointment vide impugned Government Memo No. 3747/EI/2015-2, HM and FW EI Department, dated 22.12.2015 and consequential proceedings Rc.No.514/E4.C/2015, dated 05.03.2016 as illegal, arbitrary and consequently this Hon'ble Tribunal may pleased to set aside the same impugned Memo dated 22.12.2015 and Proceedings dated 05.03.2016, with a further direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner case for compassionate appointment in any suitable post by giving necessary relaxation to the rules as considered in case of similarly situated candidates and pass such other orders."

Writ Petition (AT) No. 889 of 2021 is filed claiming the

following relief:

".....Issue an order or direction to declare the action of the respondents in not enforcing the orders passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal in O.A.No.7679 of 2013, dated 01.11.2013 while implementing the orders passed in O.A.Nos. 6976 of 2013, 6977 of 2013, 6978 of 2013, 6979 of 2013, 6981 of 2013, 6996 of 2013 and 6997 of 2013, dated 27.09.2013 by issuing Government Memo No.4903/Sec.V/2014, dated 28.03.2017 and issuing

consequential orders by the Prl.C.C.F in Rc.No.1197/2014IHR-4, dated 11.04.2014 and not implementing the said orders in favour of the petitioners though the orders obtained are the same is illegal, arbitrary and violative of 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequentily direct the respodnents to enforce the orders passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal in O.A.No.7679 of 2013, dated 01.11.2013 on par with the petitioners in other O.As with all consequential benefits and pass such other orders."

2. Since the facts and issue involved in both the writ

petitions is one and the same, I find it expedient to decide both the

matters by common order.

3. Heard Mr. P.V.Ramana, learned counsel for the petitioners

and learned Government Pleader, Services-I for the respondents.

4. The brief case of the petitioners are that they filed

O.A.No.7679 of 2013 and 7615 of 2013 before the learned Tribunal

seeking direction for release of increments, HRA and Revision of

Pay Scales etc., on par with the employees of Municipal

Administration Department under various G.Os in their favour and

also employees in Higher Education Department relying upon

various Judgements of this Court, which confirmed by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court. But in view of non-compliance of the orders by the

Government, the petitioners filed Contempt Case, but the

Government implemented the orders in respect of the cases filed by

the NMRs, who are working on par with the petitioners in Forest

Department. The petitioners are similarly situated persons and

having obtained similarl orders against the respondents. But the

Government implemented the orders in selective manner, but not

implementing the orders passed in favour of the petitioners, which

is illegal and arbitrary. Hence the writ petitions came to be filed.

5. Per contra, 1st respondent filed counter-affidavit in

W.P.(AT) No.895 of 2021 denying all material averments made in

the writ affidavit and mainly contended that for implementation of

orders passed by the learned Tribunal in O.A.No.7615 of 2013 and

the Interim orders pass in this Writ Petition, the proposals were

submitted to the 3rd respondent for onward submission to the

Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, A.P, Guntur and

Government of Andhra Pradesh vide Divisional Forest Officer

(Wildlife), Markapur dated 21.07.2017 on receipt of the orders from

the Government, further action will be taken for release of Annual

Grade Increments, HRA, Additional HRA, CCA Allowances, Uniform

Allowances etc., and requested to dismiss the writ petition.

6. Per contra, 1st respondent filed counter-affidavit in

W.P.(AT) No.889 of 2021 denying all material averments made in

the writ affidavit and mainly contended that since the petitioners

are not recruited by the Department as per the procedure, but they

were engaged on monthly consolidated basis and also they were

not eligible to be regularized either under G.O.Ms.No.212, dated

23.07.1997 or G.O.Ms.No.112, dated 22.04.1994 and since they

were engaged much later the issuance of the above said G.Os.

Therefore the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

7. During hearing learned counsel for the petitioners relied

on a Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Commissioner,

Karnataka Housing Board Vs. C. Muddaiah"1, wherein it was

held as follows:

"32. We are of the considered opinion that once a direction is issued by a competent court, it has to be obeyed and implemented without any reservation. If an order passed by a court of law is not complied with or is ignored, there will be an end of the rule of law. If a party against whom such order is made has grievance, the only remedy available to him is to challenge the order by taking appropriate proceedings known to law. But it cannot be made ineffective by not complying with the directions on a specious plea that no such directions could have been issued by the court. In our judgment, upholding of such argument would result in chaos and confusion and would seriously affect and impair administration of justice. The argument of the Board, therefore, has no force and must be rejected."

And also placed on record the order passed by the learned

Tribunal dated 27.10.2013 in O.A.No. 6979 of 2013, wherein it was

1 (2007) 7 SCC 689

held that directing the respondents to grant HRA and annual grade

increments etc., to the petitioners as was sanctioned to the persons

similarly situated in the time scale wherein their pay was fixed and

also to pay the arrears and also further directed the respondents to

extend the benefit to further pay revision made from time to time.

8. Therefore learned counsel for the petitioners submitted

that by taking into consideration of the decisions supra, which

squarely applies to the facts of this writ petitions and that

requested this Court to pass similar orders in this writ petitions

also.

9. As could be seen from the counter-affidavit in W.P.(AT)

895 of 2021, it is made clear that the respondents submitted the

proposals to the 3rd respondent/ Chief Conservator of Forest for

onward submission to the Government for further action to take

steps for release of Annual Grade Increments, HRA, Additional

HRA, CCA Allowances, Uniform Allowances etc., as per orders

passed by the learned Tribunal in O.A.No. 7615 of 2013 and

interim orders passed in W.P.(AT) 895 of 2021. The said

recommendations are pending with the Government. Therefore, in

view of the decisions cited supra and also law laid down in the case

of "Commissioner, Karnataka Housing Board Vs. C.

Muddaiah" once a direction is issued by the Tribunal, it has to be

obeyed and implemented without any reservation. Therefore the

respondents are bound to implement the orders of the learned

Tribunal in the instant case without further delay.

10. Under these circumstances, the Court opines that the

respondents unnecessarily dodged the matter without proper

reasoning, though the orders passed by the learned Tribunal and

which was confirmed by the High Court also, which is highly illegal

and arbitrary.

11. Accordingly the Writ petitions are allowed by a common

order, while directing the respondents to enforce the orders passed

by the learned Tribunal in O.A.No.7679 of 2013, dated 01.11.2013

on par with the petitioners in other O.As with all consequential

benefits. Further the impugned order dated 22.12.2015 and

consequential proceedings dated 05.03.2015 which impugned in

W.P.(AT).No.895 of 2021 is declaring as illegal, arbitrary and same

is hereby set aside with a direction to the respondents to consider

the case of the petitioners for compassionate appointment in any

suitable post within eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a

copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

__________________________________ DR.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO Date: 19.01.2023.

KK

THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

WRIT PETITION (AT) Nos.895 and 889 of 2021

Date: 19.01.2023

KK