Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Bezawada Venkata Rangaiah vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 21 August, 2024
APHC010343772024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3487]
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.NARENDAR
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
WRIT APPEAL Nos: 698 & 705 of 2024
WRIT APPEAL No: 698 of 2024
Between:
Bezawada Venkata Rangaiah ...APPELLANT
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
WRIT APPEAL No: 705 of 2024
Between:
Ala Nageswara Rao ...APPELLANT
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Appellants:
1. LEO LAW ASSOCIATES LLP
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES III
The Court made the following:
2
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. NARENDAR
AND
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
WRIT APPEAL Nos.698 of 2024 and 705 of 2024
COMMON JUDGMENT:
(per Hon'ble Sri Justice G. Narendar)
Heard Mr. Venkateswarlu Gadipudi from M/s. Leo Law
Associates, learned counsel for the petitioners, and the learned
Government Pleader for Services-III appearing for the respondents.
2. The appellants herein are the unsuccessful writ petitioners in
W.P.Nos.30195 of 2023 and 22502 of 2023 respectively. The
learned single Judge has been pleased to reject their prayer for
extension of the benefit under G.O.Ms.No.15, Finance (HR.IV-
FR&LR) Department, dated 31.01.2022, whereby the age of
superannuation of the Government employees has been enhanced
from 60 years to 62 years. W.P.No.30195 of 2023 came to be
dismissed vide order dated 22.11.2023 and W.P.No.22502 of 2023
came to be dismissed vide order dated 08.05.2024. The review
petition - I.A.No.4 of 2023 preferred by the petitioner in
W.P.No.30195 of 2023 also came to be dismissed vide order dated
08.05.2024. W.A.No.698 of 2024 arises out of dismissal of the
review petition in W.P.No.30195 of 2023, while W.A.No.705 of 2024
arises out of dismissal of W.P.No.22502 of 2023.
3. Primarily, we do not see any right in the appellants/writ
petitioners that entitles them to seek the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.15
dated 31.01.2022. It is an admitted fact that their services came to
be engaged on contract basis with effect from 13.04.2023. It is not
the case of the appellants/writ petitioners that the terms of the
contract entitled them to continue in service till completion of the age
of 62 years. When the terms of the contract do not provide for such
a right, the demand of the appellants to issue a Mandamus
bestowing upon them a non-existent right is wholly unsustainable.
The Hon'ble Apex Court has, in numerous cases, held that a
Mandamus can be issued not only if there is a right in the party but
also a corresponding duty. In the instant case, the appellants are
unable to even demonstrate a right whereby they would be entitled
to be considered as beneficiaries of G.O.Ms.No.15 dated
31.01.2022. In that view of the matter, we are of the considered
opinion that the writ petitions themselves were ill-conceived.
4. Accordingly, the writ appeals stand dismissed. As a sequel,
pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand closed. There
shall be no order as to costs.
____________________
JUSTICE G. NARENDAR
_____________________________
JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
Dt: 21.08.2024
IBL
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. NARENDAR
AND
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA
WRIT APPEAL Nos.698 of 2024 & 705 of 2024
Date: 21.08.2024
IBL
