Writ Petition No. 18144 of 2001 · Andhra Pradesh High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- B CHANDRA KUMAR
Outcome
Allowed
With the above observations, the Writ Petition is allowed
Judgment
This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in not fixing the pay of the petitioner in terms of B.P (P&G.Per) Ms. No.255, dated 05.01.1999 and the 10 years, 15 years and 22 years special grade increments as illegal and consequently to direct the respondents to fix the pay of the petitioner as per B.P.
(P&G.Per) Ms. No.255,
05.01.1999 and memo No.DP/DM.VI/PO.1/79/89,
18.01.1990 Memo No.DS(PS)/DM.VI/SP/164/91, dated 30.04.1991 duly taking consideration the total service rendered with interest at 24% per annum and accordingly fix the retrial benefits such as pension, gratuity etc. Subsequent to filing of the writ petition, the original petitioner died, as such, the wife of the petitioner has been brought on record as second petitioner, as per the orders of this Court, dated 29.07.2008. The brief facts of the case are as follows. The first petitioner was appointed as Lineman on 21.11.1968. He was terminated from service on 26.09.1973 on the charge of unauthorized absence. Therefore, he raised an industrial dispute in I.D. No. 57 of 1975 and the Labour Court passed an award directing the respondents to reinstate the first petitioner into service without any service benefits as well as monetary benefits. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents filed a writ petition in W.P. No.3182 of 1977 and the same was dismissed on 29.03.1982. Then, the first petitioner filed another writ petition in W.P. No.1810 of 1977 seeking a direction to the respondents to pay back wages and other benefits and the same was disposed of on 29.03.1982 remitting back the matter to the Labour Court for its consideration. As no orders were passed by the Labour Court, the first petitioner filed W.P. No. 12289 of 1991 and in the said writ petition the respondents filed Service Register Volume-I of the first petitioner and since the Service Register was held up in the said writ petition, the benefits to which the first petitioner was entitled were not fixed and paid. The first petitioner made several representations, but in vain. Then he filed the present writ petition. The respondents have filed a counter. As seen from the averments of the counter the respondents have admitted that the pay fixation was done as per eligibility in the absence of Service Register Volume-I in terms of B.P.Ms.No.255, dated 05.01.1999 without service weight age, and that the service rendered will be sanctioned on receipt of S.R. Volume-I. It is stated that anticipatory pension was sanctioned vide proceedings No.DEE/O/JGPT/Adm/JAO/U1/D.No.1675/07, dated
Operative part
16.04.2007 and subsequently pension and family pension were also sanctioned proceedings Lr.No.SE/O/Rjy/Pen/U3/PPO/No.2333/D.No.027/08, dated 11.04.2008 to the wife of the first petitioner duly taking the service particulars available from S.R. Volume-II. Thus, the contention of the respondents is that after tracing S.R. Volume-I, the pay fixation will be revised and fixed as per the services rendered by the first petitioner. Admittedly, till this day, the Service Register Volume-I is not traced. It is not clear whether any sincere efforts have been made by the parties to trace the same or any letters were addressed to this Court or not in this regard. Having regard to the fact that the matter has been pending since more than a decade, there is no justification in not sanctioning the service weight age in favour of the first petitioner to enable his legal heirs to receive the benefits. However, the fact remains that the Service Register Volume-I is missing. If that be so, the respondents shall make all efforts to secure the Service Register Volume-I within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and if for any reason the Service Register Volume-I is not traced within the time stipulated, the respondents, basing on the available records, prepare a duplicate S.R. Volume-I and even if any entries are missing therein considering the facts and circumstances of the case the first petitioner shall be given service weight age and shall pay the arrears by calculating service weight age etc., to the second petitioner within a period of three months thereafter. It is made clear that the second petitioner shall be entitled to simple interest at 7.5% p.a., from the date of filing of the writ petition till the date of receipt of the actual monetary benefits. It is also made clear that for non-payment of the amount as stipulated above, the respondents shall be liable to pay interest at 18% p.a., after the time fixed by this Court expires. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is allowed. However, in the circumstances, no costs. ___________________ B. CHANDRA KUMAR, J. Date: 26.11.2010 Nsr
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.