Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Srinivasa Rao Cherukuri, 39 Others, vs Prl.Secy., Higher Education Dept., ... on 21 August, 2024
APHC010155132015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3333]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
WRIT PETITION NO: 29407/2015
Between:
Srinivasa Rao Cherukuri, & 39 Others, and Others ...PETITIONER(S)
AND
Prl Secy Higher Education Dept Hyd 3 Others and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. J R MANOHAR RAO
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.
2. GP FOR EDUCATION (AP)
3. YELLA REDDY RAJANALA (SC FOR ANGRAU)
4. A KRANTI KUMAR REDDY
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-
"...to issue a Writ, order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus
th
declaring the action of the 5 respondent University in not extending the benefit
of UGC Pay Band of Rs.37400-67000 with A.G.P.Rs.9000/- in terms of
G.O.Ms.No.14, dated 20.2.2010 and judgment of this Hon'ble Court dated
23.6.2014 in W.P.No.18255 of 2010 and batch as illegal, bad and arbitrary and
further direct the respondents to extend the benefit of UGC Pay Band of
Rs.37,400-67000 with A.G.P.Rs.9000/- to the petitioners in terms of
G.O.Ms.No.14 dated 20.2.2010 and judgment of this Hon'ble Court dated
23.6.2014 in W.P.No.18255 of 2010 and batch with effect from the date of their
eligibility with all consequential benefits and to pass such other order or orders as
this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the
case......."
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government
Pleader for Higher Education and Sri. Yella Reddy Rajanala, learned Standing
Counsel for ANGRAU.
3. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the
petitioners has contended that the petitioners were initially appointed as
Assistant Professors and they were promoted as Associate Professors under
Career Advancement Scheme. While so, the State Government has adopted
UGC guidelines in terms of G.O.Ms.No.14 dated 20.02.2010 and as per the
said G.O., the petitioners are entitled to be granted the pay scale of 37,400-
67,000 with AGP of Rs.9,000/- on completion of three years of service in the
cadre of Associate Professor, but the respondents are not extending the said
pay scale to the petitioners on the ground that the State Government has
issued a Clarificatory Memo dated 06.07.2010.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further contended that the
action of the respondents in not extending the pay scale in terms of
G.O.Ms.No.14 dated 20.02.2010 is illegal and arbitrary. Further, similar issue
fell for consideration before this Court in W.P.No.18255 of 2010 (batch) in
respect of clarificatory memo dated 06.07.2010 and this Court was pleased to
set aside the said memo dated 06.07.2010 vide order dated 23.06.2014. In
view of the order passed in the said batch of writ petitions, appropriate orders
be passed in the present writ petition by directing the respondents to extend
the pay scale of 37,400-67,000 with AGP of Rs.9,000/- to the petitioners in
terms of G.O.Ms.No.14 dated 20.02.2010.
5. Learned Government Pleader and learned Standing Counsel
appearing for the respondents have contended that since the petitioners are
entitled for pay scale of 37,400-67,000 with AGP of Rs.9,000/- on completion
of three years in terms of G.O.Ms.No.14 dated 20.02.2010 the respondents
would consider the cases of the petitioners by duly taking into account the
judgment rendered by this Court in W.P.No.18255 of 2010 and batch dated
23.06.2014 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
6. In view of the same, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of
the writ petition by directing the respondents to extend the pay scale of
37,400-67,000 with AGP of Rs.9,000/- in terms of G.O.Ms.No.14 dated
20.02.2010 by duly taking into account the judgment rendered by this Court in
W.P.No.18255 of 2010 and batch, dated 23.06.2014, without reference to the
Clarificatory memo, dated 06.07.2010 and pass appropriate orders in
accordance with law within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
7. Accordingly, with the above direction, this writ petition is
disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand
closed.
__________________
JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
Date : 21.08.2024
GSS
