Telangana High Court
B. Aruna vs The State Of Telangana And Another on 2 April, 2024
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI
WRIT PETITION No.21402 of 2021
ORDER:
In this Writ Petition, the petitioner is seeking a Writ of
Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents dated
29.07.2021 in rejecting the claim of the petitioner for fixing
her pay on par with her colleagues/batchmates w.e.f
21.04.1990 as illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and
consequently to set aside the proceedings dated 29.07.2021
and the proceedings dated 18.08.2021, communicating the
same to the petitioner and further declare that the petitioner
is entitled for fixing of pay on par with her batchmates and
consequently as entitled for monetary benefits and to pass
such other order or orders.
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ
petition are that the petitioner has participated in the Group-
II examination for the vacancies in the Group-II (A-Service)
and when she was not selected for the said service, she has
approached the Tribunal in O.A.No.2150 of 1990 for
providing employment to her under the 30% reservation for
women candidates. When she was successful in the O.A, the
Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderbad, further
vide Letter No.1394/SA/2/95, dated 20.06.1996 allotted her
to the post of Cooperative Sub-Registrar against the fallout
vacancy of OC(W) of Group-II A Services 1990 in Zone-V as
Non-Local Candidate. Consequently, the petitioner joined her
service as C.S.R in the office of Registrar, Cooperative
Societies on 19.08.1996.
3. Thereafter, the petitioner requested for regularization
of her services from 1990 along with her batchmates in terms
of G.O.Ms.No.100, A & C Dept., dated 03.04.2001, which was
issued in favour of one similarly place person,
Sri D. Venkatswamy. After considering her request, orders
were issued fixing her seniority at Sl.No.396(a) below Sri K.
Krupakar Reddy, whose seniroity No. was 396 in Zone-V and
who was the last candidate to join in 1990 batch without the
roster point. Accordingly, order for regularisation of the
services for petitioner, CSR w.e.f 21.04.1990 was issued.
4. The Government has also issued the consequential
orders dated 08.04.2005 in Rc.No.15488/200-E9.
Thereafter, the petitioner has made another representation
seeking fixation of her pay on par with her batchmates, who
joined in the year 1990, but vide proceedings dated
29.07.2021, the said request has been rejected and
communicated vide proceedings dated 18.08.2021, therefore,
the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the
contentions raised in the writ affidavit and submitted that
there was no basis for not granting the pay fixation, when the
petitioner was granted seniority on par with her batchmates.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance
upon the Judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of
Govt. of NCT of Delhi and others Vs. Sh. Rakesh Beniwal and
others in W.P.(C).No.7423 of 2013, C.M.NO.15903 of 2013
dated 04.08.2014, in support of his contentions that where
the delay in appointment and the consequential denial of
benefits is the direct corollary of the inaction of the employer,
consequently, the employer cannot take advantage of its own
delays in declaring the results and issuing appointment
letters to deny promotion to the employee.
7. Learned Government Pleader for services, on the other
hand, relied upon the averments made in the counter
affidavit and supported the impugned order dated
29.07.2021.
8. Having regard to the rival contentions and the
material on record, this Court finds that there is no reason
attributable to the petitioner for the delay in issuing the
appointment. The Government has issued the appointment
letter consequent to the direction of the Andhra Pradesh
Administrative Tribunal and thereafter, the Government has
also taken a decision to grant Notional Seniority to the
petitioner on par with her batchmates. Having granted the
seniority on par with her batchmates, the petitioner is also
entitled to seek pay parity and also consequential benefits on
par with her batchmates. Therefore, this Court is inclined to
set aside the impugned orders dated 29.07.2021 and
18.08.2021 and directs the respondents to grant the Notional
fixation of pay of the petitioner on par with her batchmates
and also grant all other consequential benefits.
9. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. There shall
be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also
stand closed.
____________________________
JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI
Date:02.04.2024
TU
