THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY WRIT APPEAL No.116 OF 2010

JUDGMENT:

(Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili)

Aggrieved by the order, dated 22.10.2009 passed in W.P.No.332 of 2004 by a learned Single Judge of this Court, the present Writ Appeal is filed.

2. Heard Sri S. Rahul Reddy, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the appellants and Sri M. Surender Rao, learned senior counsel representing Sri G.V.L. Murthy, learned counsel for respondent No.1.

3. Learned Special Government Pleader for the appellants had contended that the 1^st respondent was initially appointed as a Teacher in a grant-in-aid post in Sacred Heart Upper Primary School, Kanchanapally, Warangal District on 01.06.1962. However, the said ::2::

Management has transferred the 1st respondent to Joseph Thambi Memorial School, Suryapet, Nalgonda District in the month of June, 1965 from the aided post to an unaided post and thereafter, she was transferred to St. Anthony’s Girls High School, Secunderabad in the month of June, 1967, which is also an unaided post. The School Management of St. Anthony’s Girls High School, Secunderabad, opted out of grant-in-aid scheme from 1964 to 1989. However, the 1^st respondent was readmitted into grant-in-aid service on 01.11.1989 and the 1^st respondent has retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 28.02.2002.

4. The learned Special Government Pleader further contended that the School Management has submitted a proposal by an undertaking to contribute their share of 9.5% towards pension and pensionary benefits to the appellants and the appellants have rejected the same as admittedly, the 1^st respondent has not ::3::

continuously worked in the aided post and initially she worked in aided post from 01.06.1962 to June, 1965 and later, she was readmitted into grant-in-aid post on 01.11.1989 and continued till she retired from service and most of the period, the 1^st respondent worked in unaided service. Accordingly, the proposal of the School Management was rejected by the Commissioner & Director of School Education, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad vide proceedings dated 15.01.2003.

5. Aggrieved by the said rejection order dated 15.01.2003, the 1^st respondent approached this Court by filing W.P.No.332 of 2004. The learned single judge was pleased to allow the Writ Petition and directed the appellants to pay pension and pensionary benefits by reckoning entire service of the 1st respondent from 01.06.1962 to 28.02.2002 along with interest @ 6% per annum.

::4::

6. Learned Special Government Pleader for the appellants had further contended that the learned Single Judge has not appreciated the fact that the 1^st respondent has worked in unaided post most of the time and as such the question of treating entire length of her service for the purpose of computing pension and pensionary benefits would not arise. When the 1st respondent has worked in unaided post from the month of June, 1965 to 01.11.1989, the question of extending pension and pensionary benefits for that period does not arise.

7. Learned Special Government Pleader for the appellants had further contended that when the School Management has opted out of grant-in-aid scheme in the year 1964, it is the responsibility of the School Management to pay pension and pensionary benefits, but the State Government cannot be made liable to pay pension and pensionary benefits to the 1^st respondent. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the Writ ::5::

Appeal by setting aside the order dated 22.10.2009 in W.P.No.332 of 2004 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent had contended that the State Government vide Memo dated 22.06.1992 clarified as to whether the service rendered in an unaided post can be counted for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits or not and it was clarified by the State Government in paragraph No.3 of the said Memo