Hari v. 1. State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to declare action of the 3rd Respondent in not proposing to release the Gratuity to the petitioner and consequential Letter bearing No.PAG(A and E/AP/P13/lV/S-165615P42412018-812187, dated 3110812018 of the 4th Respondent to the extent of not authorizing payment of Gratuity though sanctioned as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of lndia and also contrary to F.R. 52 (c) and G.O.Rt.No.1097, Fin. and Plg., dated 22-06-2000 by issuing appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Mandamus and consequently direct the Respondents to pay the admissible Gratuity as sanctioned by the 4th Respondent in terms of G.O. Rt. No. 1 097, Fi n. Plg., daled 22-06-2000 forthwith lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition urder Section 151 CPC praying that in the c rcumstances stated in the affidavit filec in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respordents to pay the gratuity as sanctioned by the 4th Respondent in its Letter bearing No.PAG(A&EyAP/P13/lV/S-1656/SP42412O18-812187, dated 31-08-2018 in t€,rms of G.O.Rt.No.1097, Fin. PIg, dqted 22-06-2000 forthwith pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. K. RAMA SUBBA RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1&2: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI RAMESH CHILLA, SC FOR MUNICIPALITY Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI K. BALAKRISHNA The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.20313 OF 2020 ORDER: Heard Sri K.Subba Rao, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 & 2, Sri Ramesh Chilla, learned standing counset appearing on behalf of the respondent No.3 and Sri K.Balakrishna, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.4.

2. The petitioner approached the Court seekang prayer as under: ".......to declare action of the 3'd Respondent in not proposing to release the Gratuity to the petitioner and consequential Letter bearing No.PAG(A& E)/AP/Pl3/lV/S- t65615P424/IOLB-B/2787, dated 31/oB/2Ot8 of the 4th Respondent to the extent of not authorizing payment of Gratuity though sanctioned as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and also contrary to F.R. 52 (c) and G.O.Rt.No.1097, Fin. and Plg., dated 22-06-2000 by issuing appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Mandamus and consequently direct the Respondents to pay the admissible I ;r)\ 7 Gratuity as sanctioned by the 4th Respondent in terms of G.O Rt.No.1O97, Fin. Plg., dated 22-06'2000 forthwith and pass..."

3. It is :;pecific case of the petitioner that 3'i Respondent is not proposing to release the Gratuity to the petitioner' It is further th€, case of the petitioner that consequential Letter bearing NoPAG(A& E)/AP/PI3lIv/S-1656/SP424/20t8- B/2I87, dated 31.08,2018 of the 4th Respondent to the extent of not authorizing payment of Gratuity though sanctioned is illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitutron of India and also contrary to F.R. 52 (c) and G.O.Rt.No. I.097, Finance and Planning, dated 22.06.2000. Aggrieved Dy the said action of the respondents, the present Writ Petitic,r is filed, PERUSED THE RECORD:- Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

4. petitioner submits that proceedings Lr. No. PAG (A&E) /APl P 13/ IVl S- 1656 / SP 424 / zoLA- O8/2L87, dated 31.O8.2O18 of the 4th respondent very 3 clearly indicates that the gratuaty payment details to be paid to the petitioner as Rs.7O,sOOl-, but however, the said benefits had not been released to the petitioner as on date.

5. A bare perusal of the proceedings, Lr. No. PAG (A &E) / AP / P t3 / rv / S- L 6s6 / 5P 424 / 2oLA- O8/2L87, dated 31.O8.2018 issued by the Office of the Principal Accountant General (A&E), Hyderabad addressed to the Director State Audit, Telangana clearly indicates the communication pertaining to the retirement benefits in respect of petitaoner herein in response to the petitioner's letter, dated O1.08.2018. It is further communicated through the said 6. letter, dated 31.08.2018 that the pension/gratuity proposals in respect of the petitioner had been forwarded to the Director State Audit, Telangana, Hyderabad itself, but however the said letter, dated 31.08.2018 further indicates that it is only the provisional pension authorized as per proceedings of department, but not the gratuity, the petitioner only 4 seeks the release of the payment of the gratuaty amount as sanctioned by the 4th respondent in terms of the G.O.Rt.No.1O97, Finance & Planning, dated .

22.06.2000 as per the terms as indicated in the letter, dated 31.08.2O18 of the 4th respondent. 7, Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.4 submits that the Writ Petition could be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the request of the petationer for the payment of the gratuity as sanctioned by the 4th respondent vide letter bearing Lr. N o. PAG ( A &E) / AP / P L3 / tv / S. L 6sG / SP 424 / 20 IA- 08/2L87, dated 31.O8.2O18 in terms of the G.O.Rt.No.1O97, Finance & Planning, dated 22.06.2000 with in a reasonable period. I Learned counsel appearinq on behalf of the netitioner does not dis nr rtrt f h d crr bmi CG n nrrda bv the lea rned coun el aooearino on behalf of the s resDondent No.4.

9. Takinq into consideration'. 5 a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case' b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner' and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No'4' c) G.O.Rt.No.1O97, Finance & Planning, dated

22.06.2000. The contents of the letter, dated 31'O8'2O18 d) issued in favour of the petitioner by the 4th respondent h erein. I letter The Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the request of the petitioner for the payment of the gratuity as sanct'oned by the 4th bearing respondent Lr. No. PAG (A&E ) / AP / P 1 3 / tv / s.L6s6 I SP 424 I 20 L8- Ogl2L87, dated 31.08.2018 in terms of the G.O.Rt.No.1O97, Finance & P|anning, dated 22'06'2000 with in a period of three (O3) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order and pass appropr'ate orders. However, there shat! be no order as to costs' 6 Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. \ To, SD/- P. CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA ./ ,TRUE COPY// I RAR CER

1. The Principal Secretary, Ivlunicipal Administration and Urban Development ^ Pepq1tment, Secretariat, T.S.,Hyderabad 2. The Director of Municipal Administration, State of Telangana, Hyderabad. 3. I he Commissroner,Adilabad Municioalitv. Adilabad. 4. The Prrncipal f999u1tant Generat (A anil E), State of Telangana, Hyderabad. 5. One CC to SRl. K RAMA SUBBA RAO Advocate [OpUC] 6. One CC to SRt. K. BALAKRTSHNA, Advocate tOp[JC] T One CC to SRt. RAMESH CHILLA, SC FOR rvtUNtctinrrry [opuc] 8. Two CCs to GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADIVIINISTRATIoN AND u.CseN, ^ DEVEL^OPIUENT ,High Court for the State of Tetangana, at Hydeiabad [OUT] 9. Two CD Copies BM 6 I I CC TODAY ATG 1 c; J c o 19 t'PR 2u5 (( 7 C) \i _,1_ t- r: , 1 -. ., ':. ' _ . - ;;_:-- HIGH COURT DATED:1 110312025 ORDER WP.No.20313 of 2020 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS d @tr' W