WP/28121/2008 of Nakka Sesha Rao Vs The Superintendent of Post Offices on 24 December 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMEDand THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY

WRIT PETITION NO : 28121 of 2008

Between:

Nakka Sesha Rao S/o. Ramanna

Drivers Colony, Gokavaram Village, Gokavaram Mandal, East Godavari District.

AND

..... PETITIONER

The Superintendent of Post Offices Department of Posts Head Post Office Upstairs, Rajahmundry.

.....RESPONDENT

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying thatin the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Courtwill be pleased to to issue WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other writ, ororder or direction declaring the action of the respondent in notreleasing the retirement benefits of the petitioner as being illegal,arbitrary, unconstitutional and further consequently set aside the orderin O.A.465/2008 dt. 7-8-2008 passed by the Central AdministrativeTribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad by directing the respondent torelease the retirement benefit amounts pertaining to the petitioner.

Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.CHANDRA SEKHAR ILAPAKURTI

Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY(ASST SOLICITOR GEN)

ORDER: (Per Sri Justice SESHASAYANA REDDY)

This Writ Petition has been field by the applicant in O.A.No.465 of 2008 assailing the orders dated 7.8.2008 passed therein, by theCentral Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad.

The facts in brief leading to filing of this Writ Petition by theapplicant in O.A.No. 465 of 2008 are:

The writ petitioner retired from service on 31.1.2008. Since hisretrial benefits were not paid to him, he approached the CentralAdministrative Tribunal by filing O.A.No. 465 of 2008. He also gotissued legal notice dated 25.3.2008 prior to filing of O.A. The learnedTribunal after considering the material on record, disposed of the O.Adirecting the respondent to give reply to the legal notice dated25.3.2008. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

When the writ petition came up for admission Sri S.S.Varma,Standing Counsel for Additional Central Government, takes notice onbehalf of the respondent.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

The grievance of the petitioner-applicant is that his retirementbenefits are not settled. The reason for not settling the retirementbenefits is due to pendency of attachment orders issued by the CivilCourt vide E.P.No. 741 of 2007 in O.S.No. 386 of 2002. It is thecontention of the petitioner that the retrial benefits are not liable forattachment. Such is the situation, the petitioner has to approach executing court and request for raising of the attachment in pursuanceto the directions given by the Tribunal in O.A. There is no flaw in theorder passed by the Tribunal warranting interference of this Courtunder Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed at the stage oadmission itself.

_____________________________

GHULAM MOHAMMED, J

______________________________

B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J

Dt. 24.12.2008KA

..... REGISTRAR

// TRUE COPY //

SECTION OFFICER

To