P. Vasanth Kumar v. 1. The State of Telangana

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus - (a) by declaring the action of the respondents more particularly action of the 2nd respondent, in not granting Annual Grade lncrements in the time scale, wherein his pay was fixed and also to pay the arrears by further extending the benefit of further pay revision, despite of clear directions from the erstwhile A.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No. 845 o'f 2007, Dated. 19- 02-2OO7, on the sole ground/untenable ground that, the petitioner herein is not initiated contempt proceedings and the period of timitation is over and very said institution was also abolished is as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, improper, discriminatory, violative of all principles of natural justice. (b) and consequently to direct the respondents to forth to grant Annual Grade lncrements to the petitioner in the Time Scal'e and also to pay the arrears by further extending the benefit of pay revision 2005 onwards, by Tribunal by duly implementing the orders of the erstwhile A.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.845 of 2OO7, dt.19-02-2017, with att consequential benefits. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 forthwith consider the case of the petitioner and grant Annual Grade lncrements to the petitioner in the Time Scale and also to pay the arrears by further extending the benefit of pay revision 2005 onwards, by duly implementing the orders of the erstwhile A.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.B45 OF 2007, dt:19-O2-20O7 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI ARVIND KUMAR KATA Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: GP FOR SERVICES - | Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI RAMESH CHILLA, S.C. FOR MUNICIPALITIES The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N MAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.14lS7 OF 2(J25 ORDER With the consent of both the parties, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself.

2. Heard Sri Arvind Kumar Kata, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing for respondent No.1, and Sri Ramesh Chilla, learned Standing Counsel for Municipalities, appearing for respondent No.2. Perused the material on record.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as a Public Health Worker in Rajendranagar Municipality on a daily wage basis from 01.06.1990 and has worked continuously without any break or blemjsh. The petitioner was granted the Minimum Time Scale of Pay vide Proc.No.C/MCR/349/92, dated 21.07.1994, and periodical increments were extended in 1998. However, from 01.10.1999, respondent No.2 stopped the periodical increments without any notice or justification. Despite several representations dated

22.02.2021, 12.04.2021, and 04.03.2024, the increments were not released. In similar circumstances, the erstwhile APAT passed orders in O.A.No.7915 of 2002 and other connected matters, \ -rl 1 directing the respondents to release the periodical increments, which were confirmed by the High Court. The petitioner, along with others, filed O.A.No.B45 of 2007, which was altowed by the Hon,ble APAT on 19.02.2007, directing the respcindents to release the periodical increments and pay the arrears. However, instead of implementing the order, respondent No.2 fired w.p.No.33595 of 2013, which was dismissed for default on 29.07.2022. It is further submitted that similarly situated persons, including Sri C. yesu, were granted the increments. Aggrieved by the failure to implement the APAT',s order, the petitioner has fired the present writ petition seeking imprementation of the ApAT's order passed in o.A.No.B45 of 2007, dated 19.02.2007.

4. Learned counset for the petitioner submitted that the authorities implemented the order for two persons who are also parties in O.A.No.845 of 2007, but the third applicant, i.e., the petitioner,. was not granted the same benefit. He further submitted that the petitioner made a representation before the authorities on 04.03.2024, seeking to implement the order of the Tribunal, and has prayed for a direction to consider his case in accordance with law.

5. Learned Government pleader for Services_I, appearing for respondent No.1, submits that the Writ petition may be disposed of \ -.---.-= J by directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 04.03.2024, in accordance with law, within a reasonable period

6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, without going into the merits of the case, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 04.03.2024, if the petitioner is otherwise eligible, in accordance with law within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. P. PADMANABHA REDDY DEPUTY RE9ISTRAR / 9tl t'l SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Dept., State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The Municipal Commissioner, Rajendranagar Municipality, Ranga Reddy District.

3. One CC to SRI ARVIND KUMAR KATA, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP for Services-|, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUTI

5. One CC to SRI RAMESH CHILLA, S.C. for Municipalities [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies MP GJP HIGH COURT DATED:0110512025 I ..' i l:l -: ()\ .$ .\ \* N -i- , / ORDER WP.No.14157 ot 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WTTHOUT COSTS