P. Satyanarayana, Visakhapatnam And Another, v. The Managing Director And 2 Others.

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.27061 of 2003 ORDER :

When the writ petition is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for petitioners contended that this writ petition was filed challenging the inaction of respondents in not sanctioning and releasing the pensionary benefits of the petitioners. It is contended that this Court granted interim directions on 30.12.2003, and in pursuance of the said interim orders, respondents were pleased to sanction the pensionary benefits vide proceedings dated 13.01.2004. However, counsel for petitioners contended that he is not having any instructions as to whether the pentionary benefits have been actually disbursed to the petitioners or not.

Sri P.B.Vijay Kumar, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has contended that the 2nd respondent had paid his contributions to the 1st respondent and it is the 1st respondent who should disburse the said benefits to the petitioners. This Court, having considered the rival submissions of the parties, is of the considered view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing respondent No.1 to disburse pensionary benefits to the petitioners in pursuance of the proceedings dated 13.01.2004, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not already released.

AKS, J W.P.No.27061 of 2003 With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 19th November, 2018 ajr