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

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
RAVI NATH TILHARI
P.K. Haranath, – Appellant
Versus
The State – Respondent


JUDGMENT:

Heard Sri K. Anantha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGP for Home.

2. The petitioners were appointed as police constables in East Godavari District between the years 1965 to 1972 and have retired from service between 2005 to 2010. Their grievance is that the police constables appointed after the petitioners from the year 1974 onwards were given increments right from the date of their first appointment and were drawing more pay while in service and more pension after their retirement.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that some constables of Nellore District had approached the A.P. Administrative Tribunal (in short ‘Tribunal’) raising such grievance in different O.As which were allowed by granting increments from the date of their respective initial appointments. The decision of the Tribunal was confirmed in W.P.No. 6208 of 2000 and W.P.No. 406 of 2000, vide order dated 24.07.2000. Consequently, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No. 280, Home (Police-D) Department, dated 13.12.2001, giving the benefits to the petitioners of different O.As fixing their pay with increments right from the date of their respective appointments. Claiming similar bene

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