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

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 1732

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
HARINATH.N
S. Venkataswamy – Appellant
Versus
Government of A.P. – Respondent
WP 29443/2013



APHC010296632013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3457]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 29443/2013 Between:

1. S . VENKATASWAMY,, S/O. S. VENKATA SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT

58 YEARS, OCC: RETIRED GR.II SANSKRIT PANDIT, G.V.S. ORIENTAL HIGH SCHOOL, SKR NAGAR, MADHAVARAM-I, SIDHOUT MANDAL, KADAPA DIST, R/O. D.NO.42/529-29, NGO COLONY, SANKARAPURAM POST, YSR KADAPA DIST.

...PETITIONER AND

1. G OVERNMENT OF A P, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SCHOOL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT HYDERABAD.

2. T HE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, A.P., AT HYDERABAD

3. T HE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT AT KADAPA.

4. T HE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT AT KADAPA.

5. T HE SUB TREASURY OFFICER, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT AT SIDHOUT.

6. T HE CORRESPONDENT, G.V.S. ORIENTAL HIGH SCHOOL, SKR NAGAR, MADHAVARAM-I, SIDHOUT MANDAL, KADAPA DIST.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, A) to declare the action of the respondents in stepping down the petitioners pay in grade II from 1983 as per Act 1/2005 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of article 14,16, 21 and 300 A Constitution of India and consequently declare that the petitioner is entitled all pension and pensionary benefits basing on the last pay drawn i.e. Rs. 37,600/- B) to declare further that the action of the respondent authorities in recovering the amount of Rs. 3,86,618/-from the petitioner which were already and actually paid by Government itself in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 330 Edn. Dt. 10-8-1983 as being illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Judgment reported in 2010(4) ALT 145 (FB) and consequently direct the respondent to refund the said recovered amount to the petitioner.

IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 36581 OF 2013 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to forthwith refund the entire amount of Rs. 3,86,618/- as per the Judgment reported in 2010 (4) ALT 145 (FB), which was recovered/withheld by the respondent authorities pending disposal of the main Writ Petition, Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A V V S BHUJANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING 2. GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 29443 of 2013

ORDER:

1. The petitioner is challenging the action of the respondent authorities in sanctioning the pension and pensionary benefits by stepping down the pay of the petitioner from the year, 1983 and subsequent recovery of amounts.

2. The petitioner was appointed as Language Pandit Grade-II on 01.12.1978. It is stated that the petitioner possessed Grade-I qualifications from the date of his initial appointment in an aided post. The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.Ms.No.330, Education dated 10.08.1983, granting the benefit of Grade-I scale from 10.08.1983 to Grade-II Language Pandits who possessed Grade-I qualifications and were appointed prior to

12.03.1982.

3. The petitioner was also extended the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.330 and was paid Grade-I scale. The petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 31.03.2012. The petitioner was drawing an amount of Rs.37,600/- as on the date of his retirement. The benefit of the Grade-I scale issued in pursuance of G.O.Ms.No.330 was withdrawn by issuance of G.O.Ms.No.176, dated 22.12.2000. Aggrieved by the issuance of the said subsequent G.O., O.A.No.377 of 2001 and batch were filed before the Administrative Tribunal. The Administrative Tribunal upheld the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.176 by dismissing the batch of O.A’s.

4. The employee subsequently filed Writ Petition No.26260

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