Nn Christopher, Hyderabad vs Chairman Md, Apsrtc, Hyderabad ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 1597 Tel

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                 AND
    THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI



             WRIT APPEAL No.1211 of 2017

JUDGMENT:   (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)


     The present writ appeal is arising out of an order

dated 23.11.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge in

W.P.No.36861 of 2012.


     The facts of the case reveal that Sri N.N.Christopher

(appellant/writ petitioner) is a retired employee of the

Andhra   Pradesh       State     Road       Transport         Corporation

(APSRTC), the retired employees of APSRTC have formed an

Association and the appellant/writ petitioner was elected

as the Secretary for the Greater Hyderabad Zone. In the

year 2011, the APSRTC has invited applications for

allotment of work of Traffic Monitoring activity by engaging

persons to work as Passenger/Customer Relations Guides

at Traffic Generating Points/Terminals and the work was

allotted at the rate of Rs.4,312/- (minimum wage + 7%

profit margin) per person per month. The Association has
                                          2




engaged large number of persons and the dispute arose

only in respect of 7% profit margin which was allegedly not

paid   in     the    matter.           The    record    reveals         that   the

appellant/writ petitioner was no longer working on the post

of Secretary of the Association and he wanted 7% profit

margin to be paid to him only, which was payable to all the

workmen. The learned Single Judge has disposed of the

writ petition. In fact, it is a consent order and it has been

passed after taking into account the statement made by

the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/writ

petitioner in the writ petition. The operative portion of the

order passed by the learned Single Judge is reproduced as

under:-

              "The   learned counsel for the petitioner also does not
       dispute that a new association came to be formed in the
       month of August, 2011 and he also does not dispute that
       the amount is payable to the members of the association. The
       details of individuals who had worked at the relevant point of
       time    are    available   with       the   Corporation.    It     is
       evidently clear from the very office order dated 16.9.2011
       wherein one of the conditions of engaging the services of the
       association is that the monthly remuneration to the individual
       passenger     guides    shall    be    made    through     cheques
       directly to their respective bank accounts. In that view of the
       matter and considering the very prayer of the writ petitioner
       that   the    retired   employees       association   is   entitled
                                       3




     to be paid 7% margin, the writ petition can be disposed of
     with a direction to the respondents-Corporation to pay the 7%

profit margin which has been withheld to the respective individual passenger guides who had rendered services for the period from 26.08.2011 to 25.01.2012.

Learned counsel for the petitioner reports no objection for making payment to the respective members as it is not the claim of the writ petitioner that the amount is required to be paid to him. In that view of the matter as the payment is required to be made to the individual members of the society even as per terms of the work order, it does not make much difference whether the petitioner resigned on 16.7.2011 or whether he continued to be the Secretary of the Society as ultimately the payment is required to be made to the persons who had rendered service for the period 26.08.2011 to 25.01.2012.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents-authorities to make payment of 7% profit margin amount for the period 26.08.2011 to 25.01.2012 to the members of the association at relevant point of time including the petitioner, if not already paid, after deducting the amount of profit which has been paid for the month of August, 2011 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. No order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs."

The learned Single Judge has, in fact, allowed the

writ petition directing payment of 7% profit margin for the

period with effect from 26.08.2011 to 25.01.2012 to the

members of the Association at the relevant point of time,

including the appellant/writ petitioner. Therefore, in the

considered opinion of this Court, no further orders are

required to be passed in the present writ appeal.

The writ appeal is accordingly disposed of.

The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

______________________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

______________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J

29.03.2022 vs