Chandra Prakash Sharma v. Bhawan, New Delhi-1 10001

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 issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS to declare the action of the respondents in granting pension and other pensionary benefits in lower post i.e. Assistant Horticulturist instead of promotional post i.e., Senior Horticulturist in File.No.UH/FBGfuPFi F- 1O181P1D.1072120201375 dated 2810712020 is illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional and set aside the same with a consequential direction to the respondents to pay the pension and other pensionary benefits with admissible interest in the promotional cadre of Senior Horticulturist duly following Rule 33, 49 and 50 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 with all consequential benefits which includes increments if any. 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 suspend the orders issued in File.No.UH/FB6AIPFIF- 1O18lPlD.1072l2O2Ol37S daled 28.07 .2020 by directing the respondents to pay the pension and other pensionary benefits in promotional cadre of Senior Horticulturist duly following Rule 33, 49 and 50 of CCS (Pension) Rules, '1972.by disposing of Appeat/ Representation dated: 'l0 07.2023 forthwith. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI NAYAKAWADI RAMESH Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 TO 4: M/s. INDUS LAW FIRM The Court made the following: ORDER "':r'la7 a THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WR IT PETITION o.2163 40F2o2s ORDER This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in granting pension and other pensionary benefits in the lower post, i.e.. Assistant Horticulturist, instead of the promotional po:t, i.e., Senior Horticulturist, as per Fi le No. U H/F&A/PFIF- 10 1 B / pID. tO7 2/ 2O2O / 37 S dated 28.07 . 2020, as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard Mr. Nayakawadi Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Gadi praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, appearing for the respondents. perused the material on record.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Horticulturist and served in the department for over 29 years. Nearing retirement, he was promoted on an adhoc basis to the post of senior Horticulturist vide office order No.UH/E.III82120L9/2029 dated 30.12.2019, with his pay fixed at Rs.90,000/- in Level 10 of the VII pay Matrix. The petitioner retired from service on 31.O7.2020 after rendering more than 30 years of service. Upon retirement, the petitioner,s pension and retirement benefits were sanctionedbadea on the pay scale of the lower post of .@ v*q Asslstant Horticulturist in Level B instead of the higher post of Senior Horticulturist. His pension before commutation was fixed at Rs.44,350/- (50% of Rs.BB,700/-), whereas based on the last pay drawn of Rs.92,7OO/-, the pension should have been Rs.46.350/- This resulted in financial loss and mental agony to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 18.08.2020 and filed a statutory appeal dated 10.07.2023 seeking revision of his pensionary benefits based on the last pay drawn in the promotional post. However, no decision has been taken on the said appeal. Hence, the present Writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner submitted a representation on 18.08.2020, followed by a statutory appeal dated 70.07.2023 before the competent authority seeking revision of pension based on the last pay drawn. Despite the lapse of considerable time, the said appeal remains pending without consideration or response from the respondents.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents would consider the appeal dated 10.07.2023 made by -'the petitioner to the respondent authorities and pass orders in accorda nce with law.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the respondent authorities are directed to consider and dispose of the petitioner's appeal dated 1O.07.2023, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this o rder.

7. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/.K. SREE RAMA MURTHY DEPUTY REGISTRAR //rRUE coPY// hO SECTION OFFICER The Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Education, 122-C, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi-1 10001. The Vice-Chancellor, University of Hyderabad, Hyderabad-500046. The Registrar, University of Hyderabad, P.O. Central University, Prof. C.R. Rao, Road, Gachibowli, Hyderabad - 50004. The Finance Officer, University of Hyderabad, P.O. Central University, Prof.C.R.Rao Road, Gachibowli, Hyderabad - 50004. One CC to SRI NAYAKAWADI RAMESH, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Deputy Solicitor General of India Advocate [OPUCI One CC to M/s. INDUS LAW FIRM, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies 5 To 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 PSK. BS HIGH COURT DATED:2510712025 ORDER WP.No.21634 of 2025 '1Hf. SrA/ (. o\a L\ c J (-) I 0 S llJE 20[ ] .' ,/ !/../ -Z * D Cs,'.' DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS I CO&r' g)- 4el*