L Mallaiah v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the respondents herein to revise the pay of the petitioner in the rast grade pay in the revised pay scale of 1,th pRC 2015 w.e.f., 02_06_2014,forthwith, pending. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI GURRAM SRiNIVAS, REPRESENTTNG SRI CH. GANESH Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: AGp fOR SeRVtCeS Counsel for the Respondent No.4: AGp FOR FINANCE & PLANNtNG The Court made the following: ORDER (d THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI WRIT PETITION No.37039 OF 2OL7 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief ". .. to [ssue an order or direction more particularly one in the nahfie of Writ of Mandomus to declare the inaction of the respondents in not frxing the pay of the petitioners in the lGh revised pag scales of 2015, ut.e.f. 01.O7.2013 and monetary benefit from 02.06.2014, as highlg illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional ogainst the principles of natural justice, eqtitg and foir plag and prags to direct th.e respondents herein to pag the lUh PRC scales of 2015 to the petitioners herein tuith oll consequential monetary benefits includtng arrears bg ftxing personal responsibility and accountabllitg ogatnst the respondents herein bg au.tarding exorbitant cost against the respondents and pass such order or orders in the interest of justice. "

2. Heard Mr. Gurram Srinivas, learned counsel representing Mr. Ch. Ganesh, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance and Planning and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services

3. When this Court intended to take up I.A.No.1 of 2024 (I.A. is hled to permit the petitioner to replace the vaka-lat of Sri Ganesh, Advocate), Mr. Gurram Srinivas, learned counsel, sought permission to withdraw I.A.No.1 of 2024 2 JAK, J W.P.No.37039 o12017 and submitted that Mr. Ch. Ganesh, be considered as counsel on record and orders be passed, as the learned counsel Mr. Ch.Ganesh had made submissions on behalf of petitioner.

4. Matter pertains to year 2Ol7 and, has undergone several adjournments. On 20.11.2023, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-Il sought time for filing counter affidavit.

5. By an order dated 04.12.2077, this Court passed the following order: "Notice before admission Post after six (6) weeks."

6. The order is communicated to (l) Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government ol Telangana, (2) District Educational Officer, Karimnagar, Telangana State (3) Chief Educational Ofhcer, Karimnagar District, Telangana, and (4) Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Telangana - respondent Nos.l to 4 by registered post with acknowledgment due along with a copy of petition ald afhdavit. Though notice/order ,# 0 3 JAK, J W.P.No.37039 of 2017 was served by RPAD along with a copy of petition and affidavit, no counter alfidavit is filed by respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4, such an approach by the State Government authorities cannot be condoned and keep on adjourning the matter.

7. The Chief Educational Officer, Zilla Parishad, Karimnagar District, respondent No.3, filed counter afflrdavit, on 07 .O2.2018.

8. Brief facts: Petitioner was appointed on 25.01.1977 by Special Officer, Panchayat Samithi Office, Sulthanabad, as a part- time sweeper on a monthly remuneration of Rs.25/-. Along with petitioner, nine others were appointed ln varlous schools on request(s) made by School Headmasters for want of sweepers. In the appointment order, petitioner's name is at serial No.2, Village Keesulatapally, School Keesulatapally (page No.12 of writ papers). Page No.18 is a document of the ofhce of Maldal Parishad Development Officer with details of petitioner as full time sweeper Petitioner is promoted as full time sweeper from 4 JAK, J W.P.No.37039 of 2017

14.11.1990 with pay scale of 2005 (PRC) in the scale 3850 - 7650/3850. At page No.2O is a document (proforma-Il) signed by Mandal Development Officer, Pegadapalli. In the document, at S1.No.8, nalne of the petitioner is reflected, designation as Attender, scale 740-1150, monthly pay - 740 with D.A.-77O, H.R.A.-74, I.R.-63, gross salar5r-1647, deductions-176, net payable-1471. Annexed at Page No.24 is a document signed by the Mandat Education Officer, Pegadapalli, relating to the year 201l-2012. Grievance of petitioner is that though he is ful1y eligible and entitled for DA, HRA and other allowances w.e.f. 01.04.2005, the respondent authorities are not paying the benef,rts due to him.

9. In the year 2OO5, scales of last grade pay were Rs.3,850 Rs.8,600. In the 10th PRC, i.e., Scaies of 2015, scale of last grade is Rs.13,OOO - Rs.16,400. The lOtt PRC sca-Ies were accepted by the Government for implement.ation from OI.O7.2Ol3 with monetar5r benefits to be paid from 02.06.2074 as per G.O.Ms.No.25, dated

18.03.2015. Grievance of petitioner is that respondent -.l 0 5 JAK, J W.P.No.37039 of 201? authorities failed to pay the revised scales to petitioner and thereby causing financial loss to him. It is the case of petitioner that the PRC Scales of 2005, 2010 and 2015 were not implemented in the case of petitioner ald thus causing injustice to petitioner. 1O. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner was appointed by order dated 25.01 . 1977 as a part-time sweeper with nine others, in various schools, on requests of Headmasters and Principals of Schools, with a remuneration fixed at Rs.25/- per month. Relying on the contents of the order of Mandal Parishad Development Officer at page No.14, dated 19.12.2OO5, it is contended that, petitioner was drawing a scale of Rs.740 Rs.1,150/740 and was sanctioned agradef pay of Rs.3,B5O - Rs.8,6OO/3,850 as per PRC-2003 and was eligible from

01.04.2005. It is further submitted that petitioner is eligible for such grade/pay from 01.04.2O05.

11. Further reliartce is placed on the contents of page No.18 Column No.7 l"Block Deuelopmcnt Offtcer, P.S Sulthanabad, uide proceedings No.E/ 1615/85 dated t I 6 JAK, ,I W.P No.37039 of20l7 c a

17.06.1985 full time sueeper) & regular scale MPDO Pegadapallg proceedings No.A3/ 1OB5/ 89, dated

14.11.1990"1 and Column No.11. It is submitted that as per 2005 pay scale, petitioner was being paid the scale of Rs.3,850 - 7,65013,850. It is further submitted that after PRC-2010 and 2015, petitioner is still drawing the pay scale of Rs.3,850 7,650/3850. That the pay scales of 2010 and 2015 have not been implemented in the case of petitioner. That petitioner is put to prejudice and financial loss. It is pointed out that petitioner rendered 42 years of service frorn 1977 till 2019 and retired on attaining the age of superannuation in the year 2019. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that not paying the monetar5r benefits from 2014, as per G.O.Ms.No.25, dated 18.03.2015, IS improper, arbitrary arrd iliegal.

12. The Chief Executive Offrcer, Zilla Parishad, Karimnagar District, respondent No.3, filed counter afhdavit ar-rd no other respondents counter affidavit is forthcoming in spite of service of notice to all respondents. This approach of the respondent authorities is deplorable -rf.. 7 JAK, J W.P.No.37039 of 2017 Petitioner rendered more than 40 years of service (by the date of liling of writ petition) as last grade employee (a sweeper, in school, in a village for 42 years). Contents of counter affidavit frled by respondent No.3 are as follows: "5. It is subrnitted that the Govemment has issued G.Os. revising the pay of Full Tirne Sweepers/Full Time Contingent employees in the previous PRCs who were given the remuneration of Rs.740/- per month in revised pay scales of 1986. Accordingly the Chief Executive Ofhcer was revised the pay of the FuIl Time Sweepers/Full Time Contingent employees in the previous PRCs. 6- It is submitted ttrat in previous PRCs the pay of the petitioner was not revised by the Chief ExecuLive Oflicer/the District Educational Officer. On verihcation of his service register, his pay was revised by tJle Mandal Parishad Developrnent OIIicer/Mandal Educational Ofhcer of Pegadapalli Mandal. It is submitted that the Chief Executive 7. Offrcer/the District Educational OIIicer is not competent authority to issue G.Os. to revise the pay of the petitioner. The Chief Executive Ofhcer/the District Educatronal Ofhcer is oniy competent to revise the pay of the petitioner as per G.O. which was not yet released by the Government revising the pay of contingent employees as per PRC-2O I 5. It is submitted that the petitioners by 8. suppressing the factual position has approached this Hon'ble Court and hled the present writ petition. It is I l L i I I I I i It'I I I I I i I 8 JAK J W.P.No.37039 of 2017 submitted that the petitioners are not having any cause of action to hle the present writ petition ald hence, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and the petitioner is not entitled for aly relief as prayed for.,,

13. It is observed from the record that petitioner is drawing a pay of Rs.3,850-7,650/3,850, per material paper annexed at page No.18. Primary contention of learned counsel for petitioner is that petitioner is eligible for benefits of PRC 20 15, that benefits be granted.

14. A last grade employee has to wait for more than five years to know, where he stands, whether he is entitled for benefit of PRCs or not. As on 19. L2.2OOS, petitioner was getting a pay scale of Rs.740-115O/74O, receiving the benefits of per PRC-2003, a scale of Rs.3,850-8,600/3,g50 (document at page No.14). Once on officer of the State Government issues proceedings stating that petitioner is eligible for PRC-2O03 in the scale of Rs.3,g50 8,600/3,850, petitioner would be eligible for other pRCs until found unlit for grant of other pRCs.

15. At page No.2O of the affidavit, 15 an endorsement, which is as follows: -a-',1'. It Ii 9 JAK, J W.P No.37039 ol20l7 "Remarks full trme sweeper returned Sri L. Mallaiah, Minimum pay scale of Rs'740/-' The grant has to be sanctioned from D'E'O'' Karimnagar. Hence, returned."

16. Document arnnexed at page No'24 signed by Mandal Education Of{icer, reflects that petitioner is a sweeper' and was sanctioned an amount of Rs'47,222 l- for year 201 1- 2Ol2 (vid,e proceedings dated 02 12'2OlL\'

17. A disturbing factor observed from the contents of paragraph Nos.6 and 7 of the counter affidavit of respondent No.3 (extracted supra) is that an employee who has put in service of 42 years has to wait for his pay as per PRC - 2015 for want of Government Order for contingent employees. In other words, No G'O' - No Pay As Per PRC - 2Ol5 - Bwt - 42 Years Of Service Rendered - As Sweeper'

18. A request is made by learned Government Pleader for Finance Department that due to sudden listing of the matter, steps could not be initiated for hling of counter affidavit in the matter. It is not incumbent upon the Law Officer(s) of the High Court, (Government Pleaders Ofhces) of the concerned depa-rtment, to send tt*itdJ's to the 10 JA{, J W.P.No.3 7039 of 2017 Offices of the respondent authorities. It is the duty of respondent authorities to respond to the notice(s) received from Registry of this Court to attend the Law Offices of the High Court apprising the facts and file counter affidavits. This Court cannot find fault with the Law Officers of High Court.

19. Considering the entire factual matrix of the case, this Court is of the .opinion that interests of justice would be met, if a direction be issued to respondent authorities to fix the pay of petitioner in loth revised pay scales of 2015 w.e.f. 01.07.2013 with all consequential monetary benefits from 02.06.20 14. Respondent authorities are directed to fix the pay of petitioner in 10tn revised pay scales of 2015 and pay all consequential monetary benefits including arrears with an interest @ 9%o per annum from the day the pRC - 2015 is to be released. Benefits have to be paid from the day the empioyee is entitled for, delay in issuing a G.O., by the State Government cannot be a limiting factor for not paying the PRC - 2015 Scales to an employee, who rendered 42 yeats of service as Sweeper in a school. ,..- 11 JAK, J W.P.No.37039 of 2017 Authorities shall issue appropriate proceedings within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order'

20. with disposed of' the above observations, the writ petition There shall be no order as to costs' 1S Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending' shall stand closed. SD/-P. PONNA KRISHNA SISTANT REGISTRAR l SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// \

1. The Principal Secretary, Education Department, The State of Telangana Government of Telangana, Hyderabad.

2. The District Educatiorial Offic6r, Karimnagar District, Telangana State 3. Chief Educational Officer, Zilla Parishad, Karimangar District, Telangana State

4. The Principal Secretary, The State of Telangana, Finance Department, Government of Telangana, Hyderabad.

5. One CC to Sri CH. Ganesh, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CC to The GP for Finance and Planning, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad[OUT]

7. Two iC to The GP for Sehrice6, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad[OUT] B. Two CD Copies To, TJ LS :,;. i),\i -)3" al rttg lE ,,0 \i P.q rc HF-D HIGH COURT DATED:2410112025 ORDER WP.No.37039 of 2017 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS et s\,K