THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITON Nos.5299 of 2022 and 3166 of 2023

COMMON ORDER:

Since the issue involved in both the writ petitions is one and the same, these writ petitions can be decided by way of a common order.

2. The present writ petitions are filed declaring the action of the respondents in not extending the benefit of age of petitioner’s superannuation from 60 to 62 years vide G.O.Ms.No.15 Finance (HR.IV- FR & LR) Department dated 31.01.2022 issued by the respondent No.1 as illegal and arbitrary.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners herein filed these writ petitions seeking to extend and continue their services till they attain the age of superannuation i.e., 62 years pursuant to the G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 31.01.2022. It is further submitted that at the time of hearing the matters, this Court was pleased to pass interim orders in both the writ petitions, directing the respondents to continue the service of the petitioners till the age of superannuation i.e., 62 years. Pursuant to the interim orders granted by this Court, the petitioners herein had been continued till they attained the age of superannuation. Now the petitioners herein crossed the age of 62 years. Therefore, there is no question of any reinstatement and continuation of service of the petitioners but the petitioners herein are entitled for the salary for the period they worked after

60 years upto their superannuation i.e., upto 62 years.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners also drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 05.06.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.3784 of 2024, wherein, the operative portion of the said order reads as follows:

“Having considered the above analysis, this Court holds that the Writ Petitioners are entitled for the benefit of enhancement of age of superannuation from 58 to 60 years (Act 4 of 2014) and from 60 years to 62 years (Act 1 of 2022). Accordingly, Writ Petition is allowed. The Writ Petitioners are entitled to the benefit of enhancement of age of superannuation. Therefore, they shall be continued in service as Contract Supervisors until they complete the age of 62 years.”

5. He further submits that in view of the interim orders passed by this Court, the petitioners herein continued in service till 62 years. As such, they are entitled for the salary for the period they worked after 60 years till

62 years pursuant to the orders of this Court as referred supra.

6. Learned counsel for the respondents did not refute the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that for the period work extracted from the petitioners, they are entitled for salaries.

7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the material placed on record, it appears that the petitioners herein had been continued their services till they attained the age of superannuation i.e., 62 years, but the petitioners herein were not paid salaries for the period they worked after 60 years till 62 years. It further appears that in view of the orders dated 05.06.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.3784 of 2024, the petitioners herein are entitled for salary and the respondents are responsible to pay the salary to the petitioners for the services rendered by them after 60 years till 62 years.

8. In view of the foregoing discussion, the present writ petitions are disposed of, directing the respondents to pay salaries to the petitioners as entitled by them, within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

9. Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

__________________________________

VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J

11.02.2026 BSP HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION Nos.5299_of 2022 and 3166 of 2023

11.02.2026 BSP