Dr.M.Singa Rao v. Dr. T.V. Satyanarayana,

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO Contempt Case No.532 of 2018 ORDER :

Heard the counsel for petitioners, Sri P. Govind Reddy, Special Counsel for the State of Andhra Pradesh, for respondent nos.2 and 3; and Sri T. Durga Prasad, learned Government Pleader for Agriculture and Co-operation, for 5th respondent. Though the name of Sri N. Sri Ram Murthy, counsel for 1st respondent, appears in the cause-list, there is no representation on his behalf.

2.

This Contempt Case has been filed alleging willful disobedience of the order dt.07.02.2017 passed in Writ No.27263 of 2012 and batch.

3.

The petitioners in the present Contempt Case have retired as Professors of the Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University (A.N.G.R.A.U.) (for short, 'the University') between 01.01.2006 and 31.12.2008. They along with several persons who retired after 31.12.2008 sought the benefit of conferment of Stage - VI benefit, i.e., higher Academic Grade Pay (A.G.P.) of Rs.12,000/-, and challenged certain proceedings issued by the University in that regard. 4.

The said Writ Petition was disposed of 07.02.2017 directing that the said University shall address the respective Governments of the State of Telangana and the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh with regard to the consideration of cases of petitioners who retired between

MSR,J cc_532_2018 ::2::

01.01.2006 and 31.12.2008 for conferment of the said benefit within two (02) weeks and if the respective State Governments give consent for such consideration, to constitute an expert committee to consider their cases also for conferment of the said benefit within eight (08) weeks.

5.

It is now brought to my notice by the Government Pleader for Agriculture and Co-operation for the State of Telangana that on 30.06.2018 the Government of Telangana rejected the plea of petitioners and the Special Counsel for the Government of Andhra Pradesh also states that on 07.01.2019 the Government of Andhra Pradesh also took the similar decision.

6.

The counsel for petitioners contended that the University had in fact conferred this benefit on people who retired on 31.12.2008 and also those who retired prior thereto in proceedings issued by it annexed to letter No.21109/Ser.II/A2/2017 dt.24.08.2017 and also letter No.21109/Ser.II/A2/2017 dt.18.09.2017, and urges that petitioners herein have been discriminated against by the said University.

7.

I am of the opinion that this contention cannot be gone into in this Contempt Case and petitioners would have to initiate independent legal proceedings alleging discrimination.

8.

Though there is some delay in compliance with this Court orders by both the Government of Andhra Pradesh and the

MSR,J cc_532_2018 ::3::

Government of Telangana, on that ground alone the Officials of the said Governments cannot be punished.

9.

I therefore do not wish to punish the respondent for Contempt of Court.

10.

Granting liberty to petitioners herein to canvass their grievances in a separate proceeding, if they are so advised, the Contempt Case is closed. No order as to costs.

11.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any in this Contempt Case, shall stand closed.

__________________________________ JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO Date: 05.12.2019 Ndr/*