Md. Suleman Khan v. The State Of Telangana,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI W.PNos.44417, 44418 & 44441 of 2018 COMMON ORDER:

Since the issue raised in these writ petitions is one and the same, all are heard together and disposed of by way of this common order.

These writ petitions are filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioners for fixing the pay scale on par with the batch mates in the category of ARSI in the 3rd respondent office, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and to declare the same as bad-in-law and sought for a consequential direction to fix the pay scale to the petitioners on par with their batch mates in the category of ARSI for which the petitioners are entitled in Mahaboobnagar District with all consequential benefits.

Heard Sri C.Raja Sekhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Special Government Pleader (Home) for respondents.

It has been contended by the petitioners that they were appointed as Police Constables (AR) on 12.12.1983 and after rendering services for considerable length of time, petitioners were promoted as a Head Constables as per their seniority and eligibility. Further they were promoted as ARSI and posted to DAR, Mahaboobnagar District. The grievance of the petitioners

is that while petitioners were working as ARSI, the respondents have not extended their pay scale on par with their batch mates. To that effect, petitioners have submitted a representation to the 3rd respondent. Pending the same, the petitioners have retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation. Petitioners further contend that even after their retirement, they have submitted representations dated 18.05.2017, 22.08.2017 and 11.06.2017 and contend that appropriate orders be passed directing the respondents to consider the above said representations of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that when a similar issue came up before this Court in W.P.No.41692 of 2018, this Court was pleased to dispose of the said writ petition directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioners therein and pass appropriate orders within six (06) weeks and communicate the decision to the petitioners. He further contends that petitioners herein are also identically placed and same orders be extended to them.

Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents had not disputed the above facts and contends that since the petitioners have submitted their representations, 2nd respondent will consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

This Court, having considered the rival submission of both the parties, is of the considered view that these writ petitions can

be disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider the representations of the petitioners dated 18.05.2017, 22.08.2017 and 11.06.2017 and pass appropriate orders within six (06) weeks in accordance with law.

With these observations, writ petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed in consequence.

_______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI,J Date: 06.12.2018 dv