M. Radha Krishna Kumari v. The State Of Telangana
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION NO.7641 OF 2019 ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the period of 77 days from 18.08.2018 to 03.11.2018 as duty period and not paying salary and other allowances for the said period, as illegal and arbitrary and further direct the respondents to consider the said period of 77 days as duty period and pay salary and other allowances for the said period and also to count the service for the purpose of seniority and other benefits.
Heard Ms. K.Kiran Mayee, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Government Pleader for Services-II.
It has been contended by the petitioner that she was working as MPDO in East Godavari District and after bifurcation of the State by virtue of A.P. Re-organisation Act, she was allotted to the State of Andhra Pradesh. After being allotted to the State of Andhra Pradesh, the petitioner had submitted an application for mutual transfer with one Smt. B.M.K. Revathamma, who was working as MPDO in Yadadri Bhongiri District and vide G.O.Rt.No.807 dated 22.06.2018, the petitioner has been transferred from the State of Andhra Pradesh to the State of Telangana. It is stated that in pursuance of the said G.O., the petitioner has reported before the 1st respondent on 18.08.2018 and the counsel for the petitioner contended that though
the petitioner has reported before the 1st respondent in pursuance of the said G.O., the respondents have not given any posting orders for two months and finally posting orders were given to the petitioner on 01.11.2018 and pursuant thereto, the petitioner had joined duty on 03.11.2018.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the period from 18.08.2018, the day on which she has reported before the 1st respondent, till she had joined duty pursuant to the posting orders dated 01.11.2018, is not being considered for payment of salary, other service benefits and also for the purpose of seniority. Therefore, counsel for the petitioner contended that since there is administrative lapse on the part of the respondents in not giving the posting orders to the petitioner for two months, the period from 18.08.2018 to 03.11.2018 should be treated as compulsory wait in terms of FR 9 (13) and all the benefits be extended to the petitioner. Government Pleader for the respondents had contended that in the counter affidavit, the respondents have admitted about the administrative lapse in giving posting orders to the petitioner.
He also contended that since the petitioner was transferred to the State of Telangana on her own request, the period from 18.08.2018 to 03.11.2018 cannot be counted as spent on duty, therefore, there are no merits in the writ petition and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
This Court, having considered the rival submissions of learned counsel for respective parties, is of the considered view that when the
petitioner has reported before the 1st respondent on 18.08.2018 in pursuance of G.O.Rt.No.807 dated 22.06.2018, there is no fault on the part of the petitioner, but there is administrative delay on the part of the respondents in giving posting orders. Even in the counter affidavit, the respondents have clearly admitted about the administrative lapse in giving posting orders to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for payment of salary for the period from 18.08.2018 to 03.11.2018 and the said period shall be treated as compulsory wait for all purposes and all the benefits shall be extended to the petitioner. With the above observations, the writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 19th November, 2019 v v