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) 5478

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
NYAPATHY VIJAY
SHINAGAM RAMUNAIDU – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – Respondent
WP 12011/2023



APHC010227712023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3460]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 12011/2023 Between:

1. S HINAGAM RAMUNAIDU, S/O. LATE PEDA BANGARU NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC. ATTENDER, 0/O. DISTRICT MANAGER, APDASCAC, VIZIANAGARAM, R/O. KIRTUBARTI VILLAGE, GANTYADA MANDAL, VIJAYANAGARAM DISTRICT - 535221 ...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, WOMEN, CHILDREN, DIFFERENTLY ABLED AND SENIOR CITIZENS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY, FINANCE (HR.IV-FRANDLR) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

3. A P DIFFERENTLY ABLED AND SENIOR CITIZENS ASSISTANCE CORPORATION APDASCAC GOVERNMENT OF ANDH, REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, OFFICE.- D.NO.74-14-2, 1ST FLOOR, RAJA NARENDRA BUILDINGS, KRISHNA NAGAR, YANAMALAKUDURU ROAD, VIJAYAWADA-520007.

...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 topleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not extending the benefit of (G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.IV-FR and LR) Department dated 31.01.2022) Section 3 of Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) (Amendment) Act, 2022, 4 of 2022 to the Petitioner, as illegal, discrimination and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently directing the respondents to continue the Petitioner in service till he attain the age of 62 years and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 pleased to direct the respondents to continue the Petitioner in service as per Section 3 of Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) (Amendment) Act, 2022 (G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.IV-FR and LR) Department dated 31.01.2022) by enhancing the age of superannuation till 62 years pending disposal of writ petition and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2023 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 pleased to vacate the order dated. 08.05.2023 passed in WP No. 12011 of 2023 in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. B JAYA PRABHAKARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR SERVICES I 2. GP FOR SERVICES II

3. SUDHIR MATTEGUNTA The Court made the following:

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P.No.12011 of 2023

O R D E R :

This writ petition is filed seeking enhancement of superannuation up to 62 years as per G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.IV.FR & LR) Department dated 31.01.2022.

2. The Petitioner was appointed as Attender on 24.03.1987 and is presently working in the office of District Manager, APDASCAC, Vizianagaram. As State Government had enhanced the age of 62 years for Government employees by amending the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) Act, 1984, the present writ petition is filed seeking for similar relief.

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that though the Petitioner had completed 62 years of service, salary for the period he worked from 60 to 62 years is not paid by the Respondents.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I submits that the case of the Petitioner will be examined and salary will be paid for the period he worked from 60 to 62 years.

5. Noting the said submissions, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Respondents to verify and make appropriate payment to the Petitioner for the period he worked from 60 to 62 years. No order as to costs.

As a sequ

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