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

2023 Supreme(AP) 1396

K. MANMADHA RAO
B. Peddanna – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Madhava Rao Nalluri, Advocate, Ravi Teja Padiri, Advocate

JUDGMEN

1. The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of mandamus by declaring that the petitioner is entitled to retire on his attaining the age of 62 years and further to direct the respondents to extend the service of petitioner up to the age of 62 years by continuing his service in consonance with G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.IV.FR & LR) Department, dtd. 31/1/2022 on par with the Government Employees and pass such other orders.

2. Heard Sri N. Madhava Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Ravi Teja Padiri, learned counsel and learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and Rural Development appearing for the respondents.

3. The facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Watchman in the year 1984 in District Rural Development Agency, Ananthapuram District. Thereafter, he promoted as Attender in the year 1994, and he is continuing in the same post till now. While he was working in the said post the 4th respondent issued proceedings vide No.54/G/2020, dtd. 6/4/2022 through which he was initiated to retire on 31/5/2022 from his service. While the matter stood thus the Government of Andhra Pradesh took a

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