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) 187

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
NYAPATHY VIJAY, J.
P. Venkata Rama Rao, S/o. Late Sanyasappadu – Petitioner
Versus
The State of AP, Rep. By Its Special Chief Secretary – Respondent
W.P.Nos.11786, 11806, 13028, 13101, 13227, 29330 of 2024 and 7593, 14503, 15404, 22864 and 25049 of 2025
Decided On : 29-01-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: S. Lakshminarayana Reddy
For the Respondent: Nooka Jagannadham, GP for Services I, GP for Services II

The Court held that the enhancement of age of superannuation to 62 years is a policy decision of the State Government and does not automatically apply to employees governed by independent Bye-laws.

Headnote:(A) A.P.Public Employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) Act, 1984 - G.O.Ms.No.15, Finance (HR.IV-FR&LR) Department, dated 31.01.2022 - Enhancement of age of superannuation - The age was enhanced from 60 to 62 years; however, the Court held that this does not apply to the employees of Respondent-Society as they are governed by distinct Bye-laws and any change requires an amendment to these rules. (Paras 12-14)

(B) Policy Decision - The enhancement of the age of superannuation is a matter of policy for the State Government and cannot be automatically extended to employees governed by independent Bye-laws. Courts should not interfere in policy matters or substitute decisions on service conditions. (Paras 14, 15, 19)

Facts of the case:
The Petitioners challenged the enhanced retirement age of 62 years based on a Government Order, arguing it should apply to their employment in APTWREIS. The Respondent-Society contended that their rules govern the age of superannuation, which is fixed at 60 years.

Findings of Court:
The State Government must consider the proposal for age enhancement, but no immediate continuation beyond age 60 was warranted.

Issues: Whether the age of superannuation should be extended to 62 years for employees of APTWREIS based on government policy.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court determined that the enhancement of age is a policy matter for the State Government, and employees are bound by the existing Bye-laws of the Society.

Result: Writ petitions disposed of with directions to the State Government to consider the age enhancement proposal.

Table of Content
1. overview of age of superannuation policies (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. contentions on superannuation policy (Para 7 , 8)
3. court's authority on policy decisions (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
4. court's directive on government consideration (Para 19)

ORDER :

NYAPATHY VIJAY, J.

The common issue in all the writ petitions is with regard to the enhancement of age of superannuation from 60 to 62 years as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to G.O.Ms.No.15, Finance (HR.IV-FR&LR) Department, dated 31.01.2022.

2. The Petitioners are working in Andhra Pradesh Tribal Welfare Residential Educational Institution Society (herein after referred to as ‘APTWREIS’ for brevity) in teaching faculty. Originally, the age of superannuation of the employees of the Society, other than class IV employees, was 58 years. While so, the State Government issued A.P.Public Employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) Amendment Act, 2014, enhancing the age of superannuation from 58 to 60 years to the State Government employees.

3. Thereafter, the State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.102, dated 27.06.2017, according approval to enhance the age of superannuation to employees working in institutions listed in Schedules IX and X of the A.P.Re-organization Act, 2014 subject to the decision of the Board of Directors/ Managing Committees of the respective legal entities. Subsequently, the State Government also issued G.O.Ms.No.138, dated 08.08.2017, enhancing the age of superannuation of employees in Schedules IX and X of the A.P.State Re-organization Act, 2014 stating that employees shall not be superannuated on attaining the age of 58 years and shall be continued up to 60 years. Consequently, the employees of the Respondent-Society continued till the age of 60 years.

4. While so, the State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.15, Finance (HR.IV-FR&LR) Department, dated 31.01.2022, amending the A.P.Public Employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) Act, 1984, by enhancing the age of superannuation to 62 years. Consequently, Respondent-Society is said to have been sent a proposal vide letter dated 20.05.2022 to Respondent No.2 for enhancement of age of superannuation from 60 to 62 years on par with State Government employees. Since no further steps are taken on the proposals of the Respondent-Society, the present writ petitions are filed seeking for continuance till the Petitioners attaining the age of 62 years.

5. In the counter filed by APTWREIS, it is stated that the Society was created pursuant to a policy decision in the year 1998 for tribal children with required autonomy and functional flexibility to take care of enrolment, retention, improvement and imparting quality education to poor tribal children in the State. In the said process, the Respondent-Society was established vide G.O.Ms.Nos.51, 52 and 53 Social Welfare (TW-Edn.I) Department, dated 03.06.1998 respectively.

6. Subsequently, the A.P. Residential Educational Institutions Society was bifurcated into separate two Societies namely A.P. Residential Educational Institutions Society and Respondent- Society i.e. APTWREIS with effect from 01.06.1999. It is stated that Respondent-Society is registered under the A.P.Public Societies Registration Act, 1350 Fasli and the Management of the Society is vested in Board of Governors with Hon’ble Minister for Tribal Welfare as Chairman and the Principal Secretary to Government, Tribal Welfare Department as Vice-Chairman and other Government Officials as Members. It is the further plea that Respondent-Society is an autonomous body receiving 100% Grant-in-Aid funds from the State Government and is a distinct entity. After bifurcation of the State, Respondent-Society was further bifurcated into two Societies i.e. Telangana Tribal Welfare Residential Educational Institution Society and A.P.Tribal Welfare Residential Educational Institution Society. It is stated that the State Government had issued a clarification vide circular dated 23.09.2022 stat

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