Telangana HC Directs AP HC To Pay Salary, Pension, Costs To Retired Employees Who Were Denied Option Of Induction To New HC For Residuary State Of AP At Amaravathi [Read Judgment]

In a rare instance, the Telangana High Court imposed fine on its counterpart in Andhra Pradesh, besides its own self, for arbitrarily extending the option only to the officers and staff working in the erstwhile common High Court for the two states as on a stipulated date, to either continue in the service of the High Court at Hyderabad (which became the Telangana High Court) or for being considered for induction to the service of the AP High Court at Amravati, and for denying exercise of such option to the petitioners who retired from service prior to the said date. Justices M. S. Ramachandra Rao and T. Amarnath Goud directed that the High Court of Telangana and the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi to each pay to each of the petitioners Rs.3,000 towards costs for the manner in which they were denied their right to exercise options in the Guidelines dated November 1, 2018 published by the common High Court at Hyderabad and the subsequent unfortunate rejection by the separate High Courts of the legally valid request of the petitioners for allocation to the newly-constituted High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The bench also required both the High Courts to pay in ratio 1:1 to the petitioners the salary and other benefits they would have earned from 1.1.2019 (the date when the separate High Court of Andhra Pradesh was constituted) till each of the petitioners reached the age of superannuation of 60 years, with interest at 6% from the date on which the said payments were due till the date of actual payment. Facts On 1.11.2018, well before 01.01.2019, when the division of the Common High Court took place, Guidelines were issued by the common High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for both the new State of Telangana and the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh for officers and staff of the said High Court to express their options for consideration to be continued in the service of the High Court at Hyderabad which would be the High Court for the State of Telangana, or for being duly considered for induction and absorption to the service of the High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh upon its constitution. Para 3 of the said Guidelines defined the word "employees" for the purpose of the said Guidelines as "those who are working in the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh as on the date of these Guidelines and those who may be appointed thereafter into such service." Thus, only such of those employees of the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for both the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh who were working as on 01.11.2018 in the said High Court were declared to be covered by the Guidelines dt.01.11.2018 framed by the High Court of the Judicature at Hyderabad. Justices Rao and Goud were considering the case of the petitioners who had retired after 2.6.2014 ( the 'appointed day' for the bifurcation of the composite State of Andhra Pradesh) but prior to 01.11.2018, were thus excluded from giving options under the Guidelines. After 2.6.2014, the date of the bifurcation of the composite State of Andhra Pradesh into the new State of Telangana and the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh, the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh enacted the A.P. Public Employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) (Amendment) Act, 2014 extending the age of superannuation of employees of the State of Andhra Pradesh from 58 years to 60 years. Thereafter, a Government Order was issued by the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh stating that all Government employees belonging to the State Cadre and Multi-zonal Cadre falling in the territories of both the new State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh as on 01.06.2014, i.e one day prior to bifurcation of the composite State of Andhra Pradesh, and who by a general or special order of the Government of India under Sub-Section (1) of Section 77 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014, were ordered to serve provisionally in connection with the affairs of the State of Telangana and who had retired on attaining the age of 58 years while serving in the State of Telangana and who are tentatively allotted to the State of Andhra Pradesh, may be re-inducted into service with effect from the date of reporting before the Secretary or Head of the Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh; and that these orders would be subject to final allocation of employees to be issued by the Government of India under Sub-Section (2) of Section 77 of the Act. The State of Andhra Pradesh later issued Government Order dt.29.01.2019 extending the benefit of the enhancement of age of superannuation of the employees of the State Government from 58 years to 60 years to the employees of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. Thus, the age of superannuation of the employees of the High Court with effect from 01.01.2019 became 60 years. But, the petitioners were working in the composite High Court ...

Telangana HC Directs AP HC To Pay Salary, Pension, Costs To Retired Employees Who Were Denied Option Of Induction To New HC For Residuary State Of AP At Amaravathi [Read Judgment]

Mehal Jain

Tags