S. Chenna Reddy S/O. S. Venkata Reddy, v. Dr. Y. S. R Horticultural University, Rep. By Its Registrar,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.10468 OF 2017 DATED : 24.03.2017 Between :

K. Chenna Reddy S/o.S.Venkata Reddy, Aged: 47 years, Occ: Agricultural Extension Officer, HRS, Lam, Guntur, A.P. & five others.

...

Petitioners And Dr. Y.S.R. Horticultural University, Rep. by its Registrar, Admn, Office, Venkataramnnagudem, West Godavari District.

...

Respondent This Court made the following :

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.10468 of 2017 ORDER :

In the Circular Memo No.11797/Ser(NT)/2013, dated 14.2.2016, impugned in the writ petition, the benefit of special promotion Scale-1 earlier granted to the petitioners in the year 2014 by exempting qualification possessed by them was withdrawn. Primary grievance of the petitioners is that the order impugned is passed without even issuing notice and without affording due opportunity of hearing and the same is liable to be set aside on the sole ground.

It is contended that by virtue of the scale granted to the petitioners, they are getting additional pay and allowances and the impact of the impugned order would be reverting to the lower pay and would also result in recovering the amounts paid and the aforesaid decision could not have been passed without affording due opportunity.

Sri C.Srinivas Baba, learned counsel, appearing for the University, fairly submits that the primary contention of the petitioners being that the order was passed without giving due opportunity, the order may be set aside and the matter may be remitted for taking appropriate course by the University after following the due procedure.

Having regard to these submissions, there is no need to record detailed reasons. Suffice to note, since the order is passed without giving due opportunity of hearing and order was not preceded by a notice, the order impugned is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned order, dated 14.12.2016. Leaving it open to the respondentUniversity to take recourse as warranted by law by following the due procedure.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ P. NAVEEN RAO, J 24th March 2017.

mar