Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Sri Justice Maheswara Rao Kuncheam, J
P. Lakshmi Sunitha, Guntur District – Appellant
Versus
Govt Of A.P. By Secretary To Govt Education Dept – Respondent
ORDER :
This writ petition is filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following main prayer:-
“…….to issue an appropriate writ order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of writ of certiorari and call for records relating to and connected with Memo No.12637/P.S.II/2004 Education (S.E.P.S.II) Department dated 29.06.2006 of the 1st respondent and quash or set aside the decision contained therein and consequently direct the respondents to extend the benefit of absorption to the petitioner with effect from 01.01.2001 as extended to Smt.Y.Sivaparvathi and Smt.V.Srilaxmi vide the Memo No.24383/PS.1/2002-1 dated 10.02.2003 and to direct the respondents to grant full pay and allowance to the petitioner from the date of absorption with all consequential benefits and pass such order or orders as the Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case……”
Brief case of the petitioner:-
2. As claimed by the petitioner, she initially joined as Secondary Grade Teacher in an un-aided post at S.G.V.R High School, Perecherla, Guntur District on 25.08.1998, after following the procedural pre-requisites, including the recommendation of Staff Selecti
The principle of parity mandates that similarly situated individuals must be treated equally in matters of service absorption and benefits.
Absorption into aided posts requires adherence to established rules and qualifications; long service alone cannot justify irregular appointments.
The court emphasized the importance of valid reasons for absence from duties and the necessity of available vacant posts for absorption.
Teachers appointed in unaided posts are entitled to consideration for absorption into aided vacancies if their appointments were valid and similar cases were absorbed.
The court upheld that differential treatment in service absorption timelines does not violate constitutional rights as long as prior benefits remain intact.
The university has exclusive authority over faculty absorption and regularization based on commission recommendations, and previous government notifications remain valid.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
