Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
T Venkateswara Rao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 10 September, 2024
APHC010096732024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3331]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION NO: 5227/2024
Between:
T Venkateswara Rao ...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. G TUHIN KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES III (AP)
The Court made the following ORDER:
The writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
"..."...to issue a Writ, Order or Orders or directions more particularly
one in nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the
respondents in orally directing the petitioner to retire/ not to discharge
duties from 29.02.2024 on attaining the age of 60 years i.e.,
29.02.2024 as Junior Lecturer, Vocational OA, Government Junior
College, Kurupam, Vizianagaram District (now Parvathipuram Manyam
District), despite the G.O.Ms.No.15, Finance (HR.IV-FR & LR)
Department dated 31.01.2022, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and
SRS, J
Wp_5227_2024
violative of Article 14, 16 & 21 of the Constitution of India and
consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner beyond
60 years i.e., 29.02.2024 till attaining the age of superannuation at 62
years as Junior Lecturer, Vocational OA, Government Junior College,
kurupam, Vizianagaram District with all consequential benefits and
pass such other order or orders..."
2. Heard Sri G. Tuhin Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri
R.S. Manidhar Pingali, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services,
appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 4.
3. At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
Assistant Government Pleader for Services would submit that the issue
involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment dated
13.02.2024 in W.A.No.770 of 2022. The writ appeal was partly allowed by the
learned Division Bench of this Court wherein it was observed as under:
"4) Today the learned Government Pleader has placed before this
court a copy of the G.O.Rt.No.19, dated 29.01.2024, whereby in
paragraph No.3, the Special Secretary to Government (I/C) has taken
note of the interim order and accordingly issued G.O. permitting the
concerned authorities to re-engage the services of the academicians
who have completed the age of "58 years" provided they are found to
be physically and mentally fit to continue the duties expected of the
post they were holding.
5) The measure implemented by the Special Secretary to Government
(I/C) is a prudent, as it will obliterate redundant and non-productive
litigation.
6) It is also submitted by the learned Counsel for the respondent that
by G.O.Ms.No.15, dated 31.01.2022, the age of retirement came to be
increased from "60 to 62 years".
7) In that view, we are of the opinion that the Writ Appeal could be
partly allowed, but while so allowing, liberty may also be given to the
SRS, J
Wp_5227_2024
Appellants and the authorities to re-engage the services of contractual
employees if they are found to be physically and mentally fit to
discharge the duties assigned to the post held by them, in similar
terms, as stipulated under G.O.Rt.No.19, dated 29.01.2024.
8) Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is partly allowed. The order of the
learned Single Judge is set-aside and liberty is reserved to the
Appellants to re-engage the Respondent, if they so desire, and also
other similarly situated employees even beyond the age of "60 years"
subject to the conditions stipulated in G.O.Ms.No.15, dated
31.01.2022. There shall be no order as to costs.
9) This order shall not be construed as creating a right in any
contractual employee to demand a direction in the nature of a
mandamus to continue them in service upto or beyond the age of "62
years".
4. The issue in the case at hand is squarely covered by the judgment
referred to above.
5. Given the above, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of W.A.No.770
of 2022. The Registry is directed to annex a copy of the judgment dated
13.02.2024 in W.A.No.770 of 2022. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
_____________________
SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J
Dated 10.09.2024
KA
SRS, J
Wp_5227_2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT PETITION NO: 5227/2024
Dated 10.09.2024
KA
