SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(AP) 249

RAMESH RANGANATHAN, SHAMEEM AKTHER
Rani – Appellant
Versus
Prl. Secy. , Higher Education Dept. – Respondent


ORDER :

Ramesh Ranganathan, J.

1. In these batch of Writ Petitions the petitioners, who are all non-teaching staff working in the Sri Padmavathi Mahila Viswavidyalayam, Tirupati ("University" for short), have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the action of the respondents in not continuing them in service till they attain the age of 60 years.

2. It would suffice, for the disposal of these Writ Petitions, if the facts in W.P. No. 41370 of 2016 are noted. The petitioner was appointed as a Junior Assistant on 11.01.1994, and her services were regularised in the said cadre. She claims that she is entitled to be continued in the University till she attains the age of 60 years i.e., upto 31.01.2019 as per the instructions issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government, Higher Education Department in his letter dated 23.12.2014, and in terms of the orders passed by this Court in W.A. No. 974 of 2016 dated 27.09.2016. She is aggrieved by the office order issued by the Registrar of the University dated 07.11.2016 fixing the date of her retirement from service as 31.01.2017. Reliance is placed by her on the Andhra Pradesh Pu











































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top