I N THE HI GH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WRI T PETI TI ON No.16141 OF 2020 Between:

K. Ashok Kumar & others … Petitioners And The State of Telangana rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Department, & others … Respondents JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 24.04.2025 THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers : Yes may be allowed to see the Judgment?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be : Yes marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

3. Whether Their Lordships wish to : Yes see the fair copy of the Judgment?

_______________________________ MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA WRI T PETI TI ON No.16141 OF 2020 % 24.04.2025 Between:

# K. Ashok Kumar & others … Petitioner And $ The State of Telangana rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Department, & others … Respondents Gist:

> Head Note:

! Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri S. Surender Reddy ^ Counsel for Respondents : Ld. Asst. G.P. for Services - II ? Cases Referred:

Civil Appeal No.9849 of 2014 (Arising out of SLP (C)

No.18639 of 2012 dated 17.10.2014, SCC HON’BLE MRS JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA WRI T PETI TI ON No.16141 OF 2020

ORDER:

Heard Sri S.Surender Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I I appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. The petitioners approached this Court seeking the prayer as under:

“to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the orders passed by the 4^th Respondent in Lr.No.A5/3295/2013-Pts., dated.9-9-2020 in rejecting the claim of the petitioners for payment of their salaries from the grant under the Head of Account "010- Salaries" as was extended to similarly situated persons vide G.O.Ms.No.65, dated.02-09-2016, even though the same authority earlier sent the proposals to the 2^nd respondent vide Lr.No.A5/3295/2013, dated 08-02- 2017 and Lr.No.A3/3295/2013, dated.9-5-2020 and even after passing the orders by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.14217 of 2019, dated.11.07.2019 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, discriminatory and subversive of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the constitution of India and set aside the orders passed by the 4th respondent in Lr.No.A5/3295/2013-Pts., dated 09.09.2020 by further directing the respondents to pay the salaries to the petitioners from the grant under 010 budget as was extended to other similarly situated persons in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

3. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that the petitioners were initially appointed as Karobars and later converted to Bill Collectors with time scales and thereafter, their services were regularized, and the petitioners were extended salary increments and revised pay scales over time. It is further the case of the petitioners that petitioners are entitled to be paid from the 010 Budget under the applicable government orders, including G.O.Ms. No.65, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (PTS.V) Department, dated 02.09.2016, which has been implemented for other employees in the same category. Despite the orders passed by this Court in W.P. No. 14217 of 2019, directing payment from the 010 Budget, and subsequent representations made by the petitioners, the respondent No.4 rejected the petitioners’ claim on the ground that they did not meet certain conditions under G.O.Ms. No.65 dated 02.09.2016. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

4. PERUSED THE RECORD:

A) The relevant portion of the impugned order dated 09.09.2020 vide Lr.No.A5/ 3295/ 2013-Pts., of the respondent No.4-the District Panchayat Officer, Karimnagar issued to the petitioners herein is extracted hereunder:

“In this regard the matter has been examined with reference to the Judgment of the Hon'ble High court and in terms of GO Ms No.65 PR&RD(Pts-V) Dept.,