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

2026 Supreme(AP) 127

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
BATTU DEVANAND, SUBHENDU SAMANTA, JJ.
Mohammad Shabbir Ahmed, S/o. M.D. Shahinsha - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Represented By Its Principal Secretary – Respondent 
Writ Appeal No. 115 of 2026
Decided On : 06-02-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : K.R. Srinivas
For the Respondent: GP for Services I, Aravala Rama Rao (SC), GP For Services II

The Court reiterated the necessity of adhering to principles of natural justice, emphasizing the requirement to notify parties before making decisions impacting their pay scales.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Principles of Natural Justice - The Writ Appeal addresses the legality of an office order revising pay scales without notice. The action was deemed arbitrary, violative of natural justice, and contrary to notification concerning pay scales. (Paras 4, 6)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - The importance of hearing both parties before making decisions on monetary issues was emphasized, as they significantly influence fairness and due process. (Paras 6, 7)

Facts of the case:
The appellant filed a Writ Petition seeking to declare the reduction of pay scales as illegal. The petition claimed violation of due process as no notice was issued before the pay reduction. (Para 4)

Findings of Court:
The Court upheld the earlier order of the Single Judge for procedural fairness, emphasizing the necessity of hearing from all parties in disputes involving monetary implications. (Paras 6, 7)

Issues: The primary issue was whether the reduction of pay scales without notice contravened principles of natural justice. (Para 4)

Ratio Decidendi: The Court confirmed that due process requires both sides to be heard in matters involving pay disputes, thus rejecting the appeal. (Paras 6, 8)

Result: Writ Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. parties and writ appeal introduction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. issues regarding the reduction of pay without notice. (Para 4 , 6)
3. proper adjudication necessitates hearing both parties. (Para 5 , 7)
4. dismissal of the writ appeal without costs. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)

JUDGMENT :

Battu Devanand, J.

This Writ Appeal is filed aggrieved by the order, dated 30.01.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.2597 of 2026.

2. Heard Mr K.R.Srinivas, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr Aravala Rama Rao, learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the material available on record.

3. For the sake of convenience, both the parties in this Writ Appeal are referred to as they are arrayed in the Writ Petition.

4. W.P.No.2597 of 2026 is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents, particularly the 5th respondent in issuing proceedings/office order No.E1/544(01)/2026-ZWS, dated 20.01.2026, revising and reducing the pay scales of the petitioners without issuing notice and without following due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the Notification No.PD-13/2022, dated 20.10.2022 and consequently direct the respondents to allow the petitioners to draw the scale as fixed (Rs.37,640/-, 115500) i.e., earlier to impugned office order, dated 20.01.2026 and pass such other order or orders as this Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

5. The said Writ Petition was listed before the learned Single Judge of this Court on 30.01.2026 and the learned Single Judge directed to list the matter after four (4) weeks for filing counters by the respondents. Against the said order, the present Writ Appeal is filed.

6. Though there is sufficient force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondents should not reduce the pay of the petitioners without putting them on notice, but, without hearing the other side on that aspect and without knowing the stand of the respondents, this Court cannot decide the issue pending before it. Besides this, as and when monetary issues were involved, it is always appropriate to the Court to hear the contentions of the other side. As such, in our considered view, the learned Single Judge righty posted the matter for filing counters by the respondents for proper adjudication of the case.

7. In view of the same, we do not find any reason to interfere into the order, dated 30.01.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.2597 of 2026.

8. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed.

9. There shall be no order as to costs.

10. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

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 Back to top