B.L. Krishna Kumari v. 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 issue any writ, order or direction particularly a writ in the nature of I\,'IANDAMUS directing the respondents to pay arrears of consequential pay fixation along with appropriate interest @ of 12% to the petitioner after fixation of her pay scate in the revised pay scale of 1875-3750 attached to the post of Lab Technician Gr.ll from the date of her initial appointment forthwith by setting aside the impugned speaking orders vide Rc.No. 7701lE712015, dtd. 02.08.2016 of the 5th respondent with all consequential and attendant benefits ./ l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 28344 0F 20171 Petition uncer Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the : i cumstances stated in the affidavit filed ir support of the writ petition, the High Co irt ma7 be pleased to direct the responCents to do the excise of fixing my pay sr:l e of the petitioner n the revised pay scale of 1875-3750 attached to the post oi Lab l echnrcian Gr.ll from the date of her initial appointment and pay arreaT,a (rf consequential pay fixation wrthin two weeks Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. B. M. PATRO Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1, 5 & 6: GP FOR MEDICIAL HEALTH AND FAMILY lVELFARE Counsel for the Respondent No.4: GP FOR FINANCE ANt) PLANNING Counsel for the Respondent No.s 2 & 3: GP FOR SERVIC ES ll The Court made the following: ORDER 1, wp_23001 2017 NBK, J THE HON'BLE SRI.IUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRITPETITION No.23001 of 2Ol7 ORDER: The case of the petitioner, precisely, as per the writ alfidavit, is that she was appointed as t.ab Technician Grade-II in 1995, and placed in the scalc of pay of Rs.1535-2840 and posted at Primary Health Centre, Kandi, Medak District vide Proceedings dated 13.08.1995. It is his grievance that similarty situated employees were given the pay scale of Rs.1875-3750 with retrospective pay fixation benefit, including arrears of pay, and onc B' Nagamani approached the A.P. Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A.No.6740 oI 2013, as arrears of pay were not granted from the date of her initial appointment, and the Tribunal directed the respondent authorities to consider the representation dated 16.09.20 l3 submitted by Nagamani and consequently she was granted the necessary pay fixation from the date of initiat appointment apaft from paying alTears of pay in the grade ol Lab Technician Gtade-[[. The petitioner also subrnitted a representation dated 1 7. I 1 .2014 to the 5th respondent, and as no action was taken, he hled O'A'No' 1 987 of 20 i 5 before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, and the Tribunal by order dated 16.02.2015 directed the 5th respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass orders within six weeks. Pursuant to the order of the Tribunal, the 5th respondent passed Speaking orders dated 02.08.2016 stating that he would examine the case of the petitioner only after financial concurrence from the 2nd respondent- Finance & Planning Department. Aggrieved by the delay being caused in his case in implementing the pay scale of Rs.l875-3750, when similar situated -!!-lIt\ -*m \ ist' 2 wp 23001-2017 NBK,I persons are enjoying the fruits ofthe pay scale, includinS the arrears ofpay from the date of initial appointment, the petitioner filed'l',is w'rit petition.

2. Heard Mr. B.M. Patro, learned counsel lor the pet troner; and leamed Govemment Pleader for Finance & Plaru-ring. Perused tlc recotd.

3. Having considered the respective submissions ancl 1 at the outset, it rnay be noted that the matter of awardi r,1 the pay scale of rerused the lecord, Rs.1875-3750, rvith arrears ofpay, has been adjudicated [r" the Tribunal, and a direction was jssr.red to the 5'h respondent to consider tlr,: representation of the petitioner, dated 1 7. I 1 .201 4, for aivarding of the srLr,J pay scale along with arrears of pa1' fi-om the date of initial appointrnent. it is not in dispute that similarly si,uated eirployee B. Nagamani has been 1r'antecl the benefit of the pay scakr Rs.1875-3750 from the date of initial rppointment apart from retrospective monetary benefit by payment olarrcar,. Hor.i ever, the 5th respondent rejected the petitioner's case for grantin5, the pay scale of Rs.l875-3750 and payment of retrospective monetall bet-refits on the ground that concullence of the Finance Deparlment has :tot been received and that he exiLmined the petitioner's case lor grantill:l of pay scale of Rs.l875-3750 along with amears of pay, only after r',:ceipt of flnance department's concu rrence. Even as per the counter affidavit, it is not the case (rl the 511' respondent

4. that the claim ol'the petitioner is unlawful or that simila' y situated persons were not granterl the benefit ofpay scale and also arrear; In that vieu, of the rnatter, admittedly, a similarll placed employee

5. Ms. Nagamani has been given the pay scale of Il ,.1875-3750 "with retrospective mlnetary benefits from the date of initial appointment. The Tribr-rnal has also directed the authorities to consjder the petitioner's 3 wp_23001 2017 NB(, J representation dated 17.11.2014. That being so, rejecting the case of the petitioner on the ground that no concunence was received from the Finance Department, and there being no follow up on the part of 5th respondent to pursue the petitioner's rightful claim, thereby etemally delaying the petitioner's claim for want of concurrence from the Finance Departlnent, is illegal and arbitrary, as that would defeat the very direction in the o.A.No. 1987 of 201 5, rvherein the respor1dent authorities are parties to the proceedings.

6. In that view of the tnalter, the irnpugned Speaking Orders dated 02.08.201 6 are ser aside. The 2nd respondent-Secletary, Finance & Planning Department, is directed to issue accord necessary concurrence with regard to the petitioncr.'s repr.esentation dated 11 .ll.2ol4 within a period of three weeks from the date olreceipt ola copy olthis order. within three weeks of receipt of collcurrence lrom Finance Depaftment, the 5tl' t'espondent shall process the granting ol pay scale of Rs. 1875-3750 along with payment of arrears and all consequential benefits, from the date of initial appointment as Lab Technician Grade-Il, as implemented in the case of similarly situated ernployee Ms.B. Nagarrlani. T.Accordingly,thewritpetitionisdisposedof'Nocosts'Miscellaneous petitions pending' if any' shall stand closed' //TRUE COPY// sD/- L. vrJAyA LAxMr ANT REGIST S TION OFFICER To, rtment, Secretariat, T.S.,Hyderabad.

1. The Secretary , Health Medical and Family Welfare De z. ihel'sbiietary , Finance and plannrng Department, secretariat. Hyderabad. 5. ft," nc"brntahi General, Telangana State, Hyd^erabad' i. rne oLtiiit ir"rsrry officer, Medak District at Sangare-ddy' 5. iii; il;i;i;i M"Jiiit'a Health officer' lr,4edak districf at Sangareddv' i rn" Fii"Ci"ri. osmania Medical College, Koti' Hyderabad' i onL cc td sRl. B. fr/. PATRO, Advocate to.Pvc-l- . 8. i;; dc.L-cC Fon rvrEotcAr Henlru'Rxo FAIUILY wELFARE 'Hish - Court tor tne State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUTI e i;;'cc;u cF ron F|NA-N-CE A-r.id purururruc ,Hish courr for the state of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] kr GP FOR SERVIcES ll, High court for thc rtrate of retangana t o ,tJ,:r?tt 'l 1. Two CD Cc,pies BIV o-GJP ) ) i I i I I 1 i i I HIGH COURT DATED:2710312025 t /* l 1B trrl 2025 'I : ,l t O5 \: -_ '-r".! - ,-;;;- '/ ORDER WP.No.23001 of 2017 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 0 ! .y-o LL'-o^ o