T.K.Raju, Ranga Reddy Dist And 6 Others v. M.D., A.P.W.C.F.C., Hyderabad And ANR

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.2832 of 2013 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief :- " .......to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents as illegal and arbitrary in not releasing the annual grade increments and consequently release the annual grade increments from the date of extending the minimum time scale in PRC 1999 i.e., from 01.03.1999 along with 2005 PRC......."

Heard Smt.R.Annapurna, learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent and the learned Government Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare Department.

It has been contended by the petitioners that they are working with the 1st respondent Corporation since 1988 and they are entitled for grant of minimum time scale of pay and also for grant of annual grade increments from time to time i.e., 1999 revised pay scales, 2005 revised pay scales and other revised pay scales from time to time, but the respondents are not extending annual grade increments to the petitioners though they have extended minimum time scale of pay.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has contended that the 1st respondent has submitted a proposal to the 2nd respondent on 31.10.2009 for release of annual grade increments in favour of the petitioners, but the 2nd respondent is not passing any orders on the proposal submitted by the 1st respondent. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition directing the 2nd

respondent to pass appropriate orders on the proposal submitted by the 1st respondent on 31.10.2009.

Learned Government Pleader as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents have not disputed the above said fact and stated that the proposal submitted by the 1st respondent is pending with the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent would consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, is of the considered view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider the proposal submitted by the 1st respondent on 31.10.2009 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 12-11-2019 Prv