Telangana High Court
WP/23380/2006 of The District Collector, Visakhapatnam Vs R.V.Ramana Murthy on 26 December 2006
MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.VENKATESWARA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.23380 of 2006 27th December 2006 Between: 1. The District Collector, Visakhapatnam. And three others. …PETITIONERS AND 1. R.V.Ramana Murthy, S/o.Late Kesava Rao, Retd., Tahsildar, 61 years,
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO
And
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.VENKATESWARA REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.23380 of 2006
Between:
27[th] December 2006
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.
1. The District Collector, Visakhapatnam.
And three others.
…PETITIONERS
AND
1. R.V.Ramana Murthy, S/o.Late Kesava Rao, Retd., Tahsildar,61 years, R/o.Plot No.18, Visahalakshi Nagar, Visakhapatnam.
And two others.
…RESPONDENTS
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO
And
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.VENKATESWARA REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.23380 of 2006
ORDER:(Per the Hon’ble Mr Justice B.Prakash Rao)
Heard the learned Government Pleader for Services II appearingon behalf of the petitioners and Sri S.Siva Prasad, learned counselappearing on behalf of the contesting respondent. At their request, theWrit Petition itself is taken up for disposal.
The first petitioner-District Collector, Visakhapatnam and otherofficials filed this Writ Petition, inter alia, seeking to assail the orderdated 19.09.2006 in O.A.No.8314 of 2000 on the file of the AndhraPradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (‘the Tribunal’ for brevity)in allowing the application filed by the first respondent assailing theaction of the petitioners in not paying the arrears of pension and otherterminal benefits as illegal. After taking into consideration therespective submissions, the Tribunal acceded to the said request andalso awarded interest @ 18% per annum on the said arrears ofpension and other terminal benefits. It is only against awarding interest @ 18% per annum on the arrears of pension and otherterminal benefits, the petitioners filed this Writ Petition on the groundthat the same is quite excessive. Hence, the Writ Petition.
Having heard the learned counsel on either side and on perusalof the material available on record, it is seen that since the questioninvolved is only in regard to awarding interest @ 18% on the arrears ofpension and other terminal benefits, it is not necessary to go into themerits of the case. Further, there is no dispute in regard to entitlementof terminal benefits as ordered by the Tribunal. However, taking intoconsideration the totality of circumstances and the delay, which wasno doubt occurred in making the payment, it would suffice the interestof justice to award interest @ 12% only on the arrears of pension andother terminal benefits.
The Writ Petition is accordingly partly allowed confirming theorder of the Tribunal in regard to payment of arrears of pension andother terminal benefits. However, the first respondent shall be entitledto interest @ 12% per annum on such amounts. It is needless tomention that while calculating the arrears to which the first respondent is entitled; the petitioners shall also take into consideration the variation in regard to the scales of pay. The petitioners shall make thepayment of all these amounts within a period of two {2} months fromtoday. No costs.
_________________
(B.PRAKASH RAO, J)
_________________________
(M.VENKATESWARA REDDY, J)
27[th] December 2006RRB