HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
NYAPATHY VIJAY
T A NEELAMANI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – Respondent
WP 21800/2024
##PAGE1##
2025:APHC:56522
APHC010423382024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3460]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION NO: 21800/2024
Between:
1. T A NEELAMANI, W/O. T.M.VASUDEVA RAO, OCC ASSISTANT
PROJECT MANAGER, (A.P.M.,) AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O.
H.NO.L2-L-740-A, ASHOK NANAR, ANANTHAPURAMAU TOWN AND
DISTRICT, A.P.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, PANCHYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT,
ANDHRA PRADESH.
2. T HE SOCIETY FOR ELIMINATION OF RURAL POVERTY SERP,
(REGT.NO.L311/200, CC.NO.67/2014) REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, (C.E.O.)., OFFICE AT 2ND FLOOR, PNB RTC COMPLEX,
VIJAYAWADA, A.P. PRADESH.
3. T HE DISTRICT COLLECTOR EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN, SATYA
SAI/ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT, ANATHATAPURAMU DISTRICT,
ANDHRA PRADESH.
4. T HE PROJECT DIRECTOR DISTRICT RURAL DEVELOPMENT,
AGENCIES (DRDA)/SOCIETY FOR ELIMINATION OF RURAL
POVERTY (SERP),, SATYA SAI/ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT,
ANATHATAPURAMU, ANDHRA
...RESPONDENT(S):
##PAGE2##2
2025:APHC:56522
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 to pray that this Hon'ble Court for issuance of an appropriate Writ,
Order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus
declaring the action of the Respondents authorities in trying to prevent the
petitioner to be in service upto age of 62 in 2nd Respondent, and further action
of 4th Respondent in issuing proceedings vide Rc.No.331/H.R/DRDA-
YKP/2022, dated 24.01.2024 informing the petitioner that he would be
superannuated from 31.10.2024, thought the petitioner is entitled to be service
upto 62 years i.e., till 31.10.2026 thereby considering the amendment made
vide G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR-IV-FR and LR) Department dated 31.01.2022,
discriminating with the petitioner while allowing other employees of the 2nd
Respondent to be in service upto 62 years and not taking any decision on
increasing the age of retirement to 62 years to all the employees of the 2nd
Respondent, as was done earlier while extending age of retirement from 58 to
60 years, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the principles of natural justice,
without any jurisdiction, violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under
Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of
the Service Condition as adopted vide G.O.Rt.No.l35, dated 08.03.1991 of
Respondent and terms and conditions of the Employment of SERF Employees,
2009 and rules made therein and consequently direct respondents to continue
petitioner service till the age of 62 years and pass such other order.
IA NO: 1 OF 2024
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 respondents to continue the service of the petitioner upto age of 62
years, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass such other order.
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SRINIVAS BASAVA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES IV
2. HARI BABU MAGULURI SC For SERP
The Court made the following:
##PAGE3##3
2025:APHC:56522
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION No.21800 of 2024
ORDER:
1. The present Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of
Respondents in not extending the age of superannuation from 60 to 62
years to the Petitioner in terms of G.O.Ms.No.15, Finance (HR-IV-FR &
LR) Department, dated 31.01.2022, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Heard M/s. Srinivas Basava, learned counsel for the Petitioner and
Sri S. Raju, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the
Respondents.
3. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the Petitioner
submits that on the earlier occasion, the Petitioner’s case was considered
by enhancing the age of superannuation from 58 to 60 years,
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.