Telangana High Court
WP/27068/2003 of P.Vasudeva Reddy, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary, on 30 December 2013
SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.SHANKAR NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.27068 of 2003 ORDER: (per RSR, J) This Writ Petition is filed by the applicant in O.A.No.3660 of 2001, aggrieved of order, dated 05.09.2003, passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDYandTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.SHANKAR NARAYANAWRIT PETITION No.27068of2003
ORDER:(per RSR, J)
This Writ Petition is filed by the applicant inO.A.No.3660 of 2001, aggrieved of order, dated05.09.2003, passed by the Andhra PradeshAdministrative Tribunal, Hyderabad.
The father of the petitioner was a teacher in ZillaParishad High School, Narayanavanam, and he died on24.05.1993, while in service. Thereafter, the petitioner wasappointed on compassionate ground as Junior Auditor on16.02.1994 with a condition that he has to acquire therequired qualification of Intermediate within three yearsfrom the date of his appointment. Consequently, he joinedthe service on 21.02.1994. He has not acquired therequired qualification within a period of three years. As perthe orders passed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.969,General Administration (Services-A) Department, dated27.10.1995, grace period of two years was also given tohim. Even within that time, he has not acquired thequalification, as such, he was discharged from the post of Junior Auditor and he was given the appointment asAttender/Office Subordinate having regard to thequalification possessed by him. Aggrieved of the same,he approached the Tribunal by filing O.A.No.3660 of2001. The Tribunal dismissed the same by the impugnedorder.
In this Writ Petition, it is submitted by the learnedcounsel for the petitioner that there are further orderspassed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.289, GeneralAdministration (Ser.A) Department, dated 04.08.2000,extending the time limit to acquire the requiredqualification for those candidates who were appointed oncompassionate grounds. It is also submitted that suchbenefit is not extended to the petitioner and he wasappointed as a fresh candidate as Attender/OfficeSubordinate.
On the other hand, it is submitted by the learnedGovernment Pleader appearing for the respondents thatthree years time was granted to the petitioner at the timeof his appointment to acquire the required qualificationand thereafter also, the Government issuedG.O.Ms.No.969, dated 27.10.1995, granting further graceperiod of two years. It is also submitted that as the petitioner was appointed as Junior Auditor on 16.02.1994,the five years period, for acquiring the requiredqualification, expired by 15.02.1999, as such, he wasdischarged from the post of Junior Auditor, and was givenfresh appointment as Attender on 25.02.1999 and hejoined the service on the very same day.
It is true that the Government issuedG.O.Ms.No.289, General Administration (Ser.A)Department, dated 04.08.2000, extending the time limit toacquire the required qualification for those candidates,who were appointed on compassionate grounds. But, it isto be noticed that the petitioner was discharged from thepost of Junior Auditor much earlier to the orders passedby the Government in the aforesaid G.O. The petitionerwas appointed as Junior Auditor on 16.02.1994 with acondition that he has to acquire the required qualificationwithin a period of three years, which expired in the year1997, and thereafter, the Government granted further twoyears as a grace period, which time also expired by15.02.1999. Although it is contended by the learnedcounsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was notextended the benefit of orders passed by the Governmentin G.O.Ms.No.289, dated 04.08.2000, in view ofretrospective effect of such orders passed by theGovernment, the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of the same. It is also to be noticed that there is no interimorder passed by this Court while admitting the WritPetition. It is not in dispute that after discharge of thepetitioner from the post of Junior Auditor, he wasappointed as a fresh candidate as Attender/OfficeSubordinate and being continued as such.
For the aforesaid reasons and in view of the reasonsrecorded by the Tribunal, we do not find any ground in thisWrit Petition to interfere with the impugned order at thisstage.
In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition isdismissed. No order as to costs.
Conclusion
Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending in this WritPetition shall stand closed.
______________________
R.SUBHASH REDDY, J
30[th] DECEMBER, 2013.
________________________
A.SHANKAR NARAYANA, J
kvni