Skip to content


G. Atchanna and Others Vs. the General Manager, Telecom District, Bsnl, Kurnool and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad

Decided On

Case Number

Original Application No. 337 of 2009

Judge

Appellant

G. Atchanna and Others

Respondent

The General Manager, Telecom District, Bsnl, Kurnool and Others

Advocates:

Counsel for the Applicant : K. Venkateswara Rao, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondents : V. Rajeswara Rao, Addl.CGSC.

Excerpt:


.....preferred s.l.p.no.8488/2006 and the same is pending before the hon'ble supreme court and the hon'ble supreme court granted stay of operation of the order passed in the w.a.1959/2005 and batch and subsequently one similar case was filed as w.p.18200/2006 and the hon'ble a.p.high court disposed of the said writ petition directing the respondents to extend the benefit of relief granted in w.a.1959/2005 and batch and fix the pay of the petitioners in accordance with the judgement in the said writ appeals, if the respondents fail in s.l.p.no.8488/2006 and batch and therefore similar orders may be passed in this application also. but the learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in those appeals monetary benefits are given only from the date of the judgement of writ petition on the ground of abnormal delay in approaching the court, whereas in this application the applicants have approached promptly to this tribunal and except the first applicant all other applicants are entitled from november 2008 and therefore they may be granted the relief with effect from the date of their entitlement and so far as the first applicant is concerned he may be extended monetary benefit only.....

Judgment:


ORAL ORDER

{As per Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.Lakshmana Reddy, Vice Chairman }

Heard Mr.K.Venkateswara Rao, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.V.Rajeswara Rao, learned standing counsel for the respondents.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that this is a covered case and the Hon'ble A.P.High Court held that similarly situated persons are entitled for the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000, but the respondents have preferred S.L.P.No.8488/2006 and the same is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court granted stay of operation of the order passed in the W.A.1959/2005 and batch and subsequently one similar case was filed as W.P.18200/2006 and the Hon'ble A.P.High Court disposed of the said Writ Petition directing the respondents to extend the benefit of relief granted in W.A.1959/2005 and batch and fix the pay of the petitioners in accordance with the judgement in the said writ appeals, if the respondents fail in S.L.P.No.8488/2006 and batch and therefore similar orders may be passed in this application also. But the learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in those appeals monetary benefits are given only from the date of the judgement of Writ Petition on the ground of abnormal delay in approaching the Court, whereas in this application the applicants have approached promptly to this Tribunal and except the first applicant all other applicants are entitled from November 2008 and therefore they may be granted the relief with effect from the date of their entitlement and so far as the first applicant is concerned he may be extended monetary benefit only from the date of filing of this application following the orders passed in W.A. 1959/2005 and batch.

3. In view of the said submission, we dispose of this application at the admission stage with a direction to the respondents to fix the scale of the pay of the applicants in accordance with the judgement in W.A.1959/2005 and batch on the file of Hon'ble High Court of A.P., in case the respondents could not succeed in S.L.P.No.8488/2006 and batch and so far as the monetary benefit is concerned the first applicant shall be given the monetary benefit only from the date of filing of this application and in respect of the remaining applicants monetary benefit shall be given from the date of their entitlement i.e. from November 2008.

4. O.A. is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //