← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/27985/2018disposed of no costs

D.Mathaiah v. The State Of Ap

2018-08-08Abhinand Kumar Shavili,Suresh Kumar Kait2 pages

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT & HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI W.P. No. 27985 of 2018 O R D E R:- (ORAL) (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Suresh Kumar Kait) This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 19.01.2017 in O.A.No. 3072 of 2014 passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad whereby the application filed by the petitioners under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking to count their N.M.R. service prior to regularization of their services for the purpose of pension benefits and seniority without any monitory benefits, has been dismissed.

Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and with their consent this writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

The petitioners were initially appointed as N.M.Rs. for the period from 1986 to 1988 and their services were regularized in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 212, Finance and Planning (FW.PC.III) Department, dated 22.04.1994 by virtue of G.O.Ms.22 Irrigation and CAD Department, dated 24.02.2011. The petitioners are seeking declaration that the action of the respondents in not counting their services rendered as N.M.Rs. prior to regularization of their services for the purpose of pension benefits and seniority, as illegal and arbitrary.

SKK,J & AKS,J WP_27985_2018 When similar issue came up in W.P.No. 33288 of 2012, this Court directed the Government to extend the benefit to the petitioners in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in B.Srinivasulu v. Nellore Municipal Corporat ion (Civil Appeal No. 6318 of 2015, dat ed 17.08.2015).

Accordingly, issue being the same in the present writ petition, the respondents are directed to extend benefit to the petitioners in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of B.Srinivasulu cited supra, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

_____________________ SURESH KUMAR KAIT, J 08.08.2018 _________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J bcj