Supreme Court - Daily Orders
M.S. Prasad & Ors. Etc. vs M.S. Prasad . Etc. on 13 January, 2016
Bench: Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, Arun Mishra
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).406/2008 AND 408/2008]
(CIVIL APPEAL NOS.406-409/2008)
M.S. PRASAD & ORS. ETC. APPELLANT (S)
VERSUS
GOVT. OF A.P. & ORS. RESPONDENT (S)
O R D E R
Heard learned counsel for the parties. When we perused the impugned judgment we find that after a detailed analysis of the claim of the appellants along with certain other petitioners/appellants before the High Court, the Division Bench has found, as a matter of fact, the following resultant position:-
Signature Not Verified
“In the circumstances, we are of Digitally signed by Jayant Kumar Arora Date: 2016.01.14 the considered opinion that none of 17:00:56 IST Reason: the decisions cited have any 1 application to the fact situation on hand. The attempt on the part of the petitioners is nothing but to raise and re-agitate the very issues and contentions which were rejected by a Division Bench of this Court vide Judgment in W.A. Nos.424 and 425 of 2001 dated 16.10.2001 referred to hereinabove.
In our considered opinion, G.O.Ms. No.314 dated 26.12.2000 which is very comprehensive in its nature and which has put an end to the claim of the petitioners herein for any pay scales on par with Category-V employees working in the District Cooperative Central Bank has been upheld by this Court in the decision referred to hereinabove, and the same in our considered opinion, puts an end to the controversy.
For the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any merit whatsoever in these writ petitions. The writ petitions shall stand accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.” Having regard to such a categoric finding rendered by the Division Bench, which discloses that the very same claim was raised by the appellants in their earlier Writ Petition No.21488 of 2000 along with a batch and which were dismissed and the same was also upheld by the Division Bench in W.A. No.424 of 2001. We do not find any scope to permit the appellants to re-agitate the issue once over again. However, Mr. R. Venkatramani, learned 2 senior counsel appearing for the appellants, during the course of his submissions, drew our attention to a G.O.Ms. No.338 dated 12.12.2007 and contended that the State Government has now come forward to give the pay protection to the very same category of employees like that of the appellants, that such G.O. and subsequent proceedings of the Guntur District Co-operative Central Bank Limited, Administrative Office-Guntur dated 11.10.2008, which, according to the learned counsel for the appellant, also extended the benefit of pay protection to the Paid Secretaries (De-caderised).
Learned senior counsel, therefore, attempted to persuade us to take into account the said subsequent G.O. dated 12.12.2007 and the proceedings dated 11.8.2008 to revisit the case of the appellants which we are not inclined to do.
Therefore, while dismissing these appeals, we leave it open for the appellants to seek for appropriate remedies based on the above referred two subsequent proceedings before the Government and it is for the Government to 3 consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
................................J. [FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA] ................................J. [ARUN MISHRA] NEW DELHI;
JANUARY 13, 2016.
4
ITEM NO.106 COURT NO.6 SECTION XIIA
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal No(s). 406-409/2008] M.S. PRASAD & ORS. ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUS GOVT. OF A.P. & ORS. Respondent(s) (with appln(s) for permission to file additional documents and office report) Date : 13/01/2016 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA For Appellant(s) Mr. R. Venkatramani,Sr.Adv.
Mr. C.S.N. Mohan Rao,Adv. Mr. D. Mahesh Babu,Adv.
Ms. Suchitra Hrangkhawl,Adv. Mr. T.V. Bhaskar Reddy,Adv. Mr. Yashraj Singh Bundela,Adv. Mrs. Neelam Singh,Adv.
Mr. Amit K. Nain,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. G. Ramakrishna Prasad,Adv.
Mr. Mohd. Wasay Khan,Adv. Mr. Suyodhan Byrapaneni,Adv. Ms. Filza Moonis,Adv.
Mr. Bharat J. Joshi,Adv.
Mr. Guntur Prabhakar,Adv. Ms. Prerna Singh,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The appeals are dismissed in terms of the signed order. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(NARENDRA PRASAD) (SHARDA KAPOOR)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
(Signed order is placed on the file) 5