Telangana High Court
G. Suguna Bai vs The State Of Telangana And 5 Others on 12 October, 2023
Bench: P.Madhavi Devi
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI
WRIT PETITION No.17481 of 2022
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:
"...to issue a writ order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of
Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not implementing the
orders of the erstwhile Honble Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.
9450 of 2012 dated 30.11.2012 in spite of having knowledge that the subject
involved in this matter has attained finality as per to the Division Bench orders in
W.P.No. 21866 of 2021 and batch dated 24.02.2022 and another Division Bench
orders of this Honble High Court of Telangana State passed in W.P.No. 32896 of
2013 and Batch Dated 24/02/2022 and further Division Bench orders of the
Honble High Court of A P in Writ Petition No. 33594 of 2013 dated 06.04.2021
with regard to recovery/withheld retirement gratuity amounts from retired Telugu
Pandits by Act 1 of 2005 who availed the benefit under G.O.Ms.No.330 dated
10.08.1983 and also in spite of Law laid down by the Full Bench of Honble High
Court in W.P.No.21457 of 2004 Dated 16.04.2010 reported in (2010) 4 ALT 145 is
as arbitrary illegal and violation of 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and
consequently declare that the Petitioner is entitled for repayment/refund of the
recovered/withheld gratuity amount of Rs.3,00,000/- and further direct the
Respondents to refund the above said recovered/withheld gratuity amount of
Rs.3,00,000/- by implement the orders of erstwhile of A.P.Administrative
Tribunal in O.A.No. 9450 of 2012 dated 30.11.2012 with in a stipulated time
along with interest on delay payment as per Memo No.16077/135/A.2/Pen-
I/2004 (Interest on delayed payment of retirement gratuity) Dated 20.02.2006
from the date on which the gratuity becomes payable till such payment is made
and to pass..."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the case of
State Language Teachers' Association, represented by its State
General Secretary, Palla Sathaiah and others v State of Andhra
Pradesh, represented by its Secretary to Government, Legislative
Affairs and Justice, Hyderabad and others 1 of the erstwhile High Court
of Andhra Pradesh, it was held that Act 1 of 2005 is constitutionally valid,
yet, however, there was a clear observation at para 73 thereof not to
recover any amount from any of the Language Pandits Grade II, who was
2010(4) ALT 145 = 2010 (0) Supreme (A) 308
PMD,J
W.P.No.17481 of 2022
given benefit of scale of pay of Grade-I. It is submitted that the alleged
payment made to the petitioner is not on account of any fault on her part,
the petitioner was a LANGUAGE PANDIT GRADE-II and in view of the
judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and others
v Rafiq Masih (White Washer) 2 no recovery can be made after the
retirement of such an employee. It is submitted that the petitioner has
also approached the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (A.P.A.T.) by
filing O.A.No.9450 of 2012 and the A.P.A.T. vide order dated 30.11.2012
allowed the O.A. however, the respondents have not implemented the
orders of the A.P.A.T. and therefore, the present writ petition has been
filed.
3. Learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for
respondents is also heard.
4. Taking into consideration the rival contentions and the Full Bench
judgment in State Language Teachers' Association's case referred to
above and the Apex Court judgment in Rafiq Masih (White Washer)
referred to above and also the view taken by the Division Bench of the
High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad passed in W.P.Nos.32896 and
33790 of 2013 and W.P.Nos.21866, 26512 and 26521 of 2021 dated
24.02.2022 and the law laid down in various Apex Court judgments
(2014)8 SCC 833
PMD,J
W.P.No.17481 of 2022
referred thereto and that the subject matter has already been discussed
elaborately in W.P.No.24687 of 2013 by this Court vide order dated
17.08.2022, this Court finds that the alleged excess payment made to the
petitioner is not on account of any fault on her part and therefore, no
recovery can be made. The Government has also issued a Memo
No.6122/Ser.II.A1/2023, dated 10.08.2023 taking note of the above
Judgments and that the operation of the Ordinance and the Act are held
to be bad and that they would operative in future from the date of the
ordinance and the Director of School Education was directed to take
necessary action accordingly.
5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of and the respondents
are directed to refund the sum of Rs.3,00,000/- recovered from the
petitioner, on proper acknowledgment, within a period of three (03)
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no
order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
____________________________
JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI
Date: 12.10.2023
Note: Furnish C.C. by 18.10.2023.
B/o.
PRN
PMD,J
W.P.No.17481 of 2022
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI
WRIT PETITION No.17481 of 2022
Date: 12.10.2023
Note: Furnish C.C. by 18.10.2023.
B/o.
PRN
