WP/20377/2005 of K.V. Narasaiah, Vs The Andhra Pradesh, on 30 December 2005

ORDER:

The petitioner was working as a Superintendent in the Falaknuma Depot ofAPSRTC. With effect from 31.03.2004, he was compulsorily retired fromservice on the basis of an order, dated 20.01.2004, on medical grounds. Hisgrievance is that the relevant retirement benefits have not been extended tohim, despite his representation.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counselfor the respondents.

It is not in dispute that the petitioner stood compulsorily retired from servicewith effect from 31.03.2004. The petitioner states that he was extended thebenefits up to Rs.1,41,342/-, whereas several other amounts, such as gratuity,provident fund for the left over period were not extended to him. The recorddoes not disclose that he has made any specific representation, narrating thesegrievances. The representation, which is said to have been made by thepetitioner, is as vague as it can be.

Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to submit a representation pointing out the nature and extent of benefits, whichaccording to him are payable by the respondent. As and when such arepresentation is made by the petitioner, the respondents shall passappropriate orders thereon, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date ofreceipt of the same. There shall be no order as to costs.

Jsu

_________

30.12.2005