Telangana High Court
Dr.G.Noor Ahmed vs State Of Telangana And Another on 28 June, 2021
Author: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Bench: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT PETITION No.10056 of 2021
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is being disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of learned counsel for both the parties.
This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following substantive relief:
"... to issue an appropriate writ more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not paying the arrears of pension and other benefits due to the Petitioners in accordance with the order dt 13.06.2012 in OA.No.4067/2012 of the erstwhile AP Administrative Tribunal as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 and consequently direct the Respondents to pay all the arrears and other benefits after re-fixation of the pension in accordance with the order of the Tribunal and the order of this Honble Court in WP No.12572/2017 and WP No.25967/2017 dt 19.12. 2018 along with interest @ 12 % per annum."
Heard Sri M.Srikanth, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Services-II appearing for the respondents.
It has been contended by the petitioners that they were initially appointed as Medical Officers/Assistant Professors/Civil Assistant Surgeons, as the case may be, on honorarium basis and after rendering considerable length of service, their services were regularised vide order dated 01.4.1990. The service rendered by the petitioners on honorarium basis was not counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pension and in those circumstances, they 2 have filed O.A.No.4067 of 2012 before the then A.P. Administrative Tribunal and the Tribunal was pleased to allow the said O.A. vide order dated 13.6.2012 directing the respondents to treat the honorarium service of the petitioners as the qualifying service for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits. Aggrieved by the said orders, the State filed W.P.No.12572 of 2017 and this Court was pleased to dismiss the said Writ Petition on 19.12.2018 confirming the order passed by the Tribunal. The grievance of the petitioners is that though the order passed by the Tribunal in the said O.A. was confirmed by this Court in the aforesaid Writ Petition, the respondents are not complying with the said order.
Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that petitioner No.2 expired during the pendency of the Writ Petition and his legal heirs were brought on record. He further contended that the petitioners have submitted a detailed representation to the respondents on 08.7.2020, but so far the respondents have not passed any orders on the said representation. Therefore, the learned counsel contended that appropriate orders be passed in this Writ Petition directing the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioners on 08.7.2020 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Learned Government Pleader for Services-II appearing for the respondents contended that since the petitioners' representation is pending with the respondents, the respondents would consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
3
This Court, having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties, is of the considered view that the Writ Petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioners on 08.7.2020 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 28th June, 2021 dr