Telangana High Court
WP/26503/2006 of M.A.Bakshu, Vs The Depot Manager, APSRTC Corporation, on 22 December 2006
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND SIX P R E S E N T THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA * * * WP.No.26503 of 2006 Between: M.A. Bakshu, s/o. late Md. Sulthan, aged about 59 years, Rtd.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND SIXP R E S E N T
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
* * *
WP.No.26503 of 2006
Between:M.A. Bakshu, s/o. late Md. Sulthan,aged about 59 years, Rtd. Employee, APSRTC,R/o. H.No.16A-5-79, Balaji Street, Eluru,West Godavari district. … PetitionerVersusThe Depot Manager,APSRTC Eluru,West Godavari District. … RespondentCounsel for the Petitioner: M/s. A.Rama SubbaiahCounsel for the Respondent: Sri R.ManmadhaReddy Standing Counsel forthe Respondent.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANAW.P. No. 26503 of 2006
Oral order:
The writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondentin withholding and not releasing the ‘gratuity amount’ payable to thepetitioner out of his terminal benefits in Proceedings No.E.21756(18)/06, dated dd08-9-2006, as wholly contrary to law, legallyunsustainable and opposed to the principles of justice, equity andconsequently direct the respondents to release the gratuity amountspayable to him and to pass such other suitable orders.
The case of the petitioner is that he retired as Traffic Inspector-IIIon 31-7-2006 on attaining the age of superannuation and that onretirement, he was entitled to certain terminal benefits such as CCSProvident Fund, SBT Fund, Leave Encashment and Gratuity, but therespondents on the basis of interim orders passed by civil courts ofEluru and Bhimavaram in the suits filed against him by some persons,issued Proceedings NO.E2/736(18)06-ELR dated 8-9-2006 with-holding the release of terminal benefits, including gratuity payable,which the petitioner contends is illegal and arbitrary, for the amountswithheld are not attachable under the provisions of the Civil ProcedureCode, 1908.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learnedStanding Counsel for the respondent-APSRTC.
Since the impugned order withholding the retrial benefitsmentioned therein came to be passed in view of the interim orderspassed by the Civil Courts in the suits for recovery of monies filedagainst the petitioner by some persons, and since it is the contention ofthe petitioner that the amounts withheld are not attachable under the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, I deem it appropriate todispose of the writ petition with the following directions:
The petitioner is directed to approach the Civil Courts, whichpassed the orders in the I.A. directing attachment, in pursuance ofwhich the impugned order attaching the terminal benefits of thepetitioner came to be passed, and bring it to the notice of the Courtsthat the amounts directed to be attached are not attachable under theprovisions of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, and seek raising ofattachments. If the petitioner makes any such application, the Courtsconcerned shall consider the same in the light of the provisions of theCivil Procedure Code, 1908, and pass appropriate orders thereon.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
________________
N.V. RAMANA, J.
Date: 22nd December, 2006.ISL