IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWELVETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 19781 of 1999 Between: 1 The Director General, Telecommunications, Sanchar Bhavan, New Delhi. 2 The Chief General, Telecommunications, A.P., circle, Abids, Nampally Station Road, Hyd., ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 G.Prabhakakr Rao S/o Sundara Ramaiah R/o Secunderabad, C/o Sri V.V.Rao, Advocate, 1-8-430, 1st floor, Umagardens, Chikkadepally, Hyd-20. 2 The Registrar, CAT, Hyd., .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of certiorari by calling for the records of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench in OA No.1762/97 and quash the orders dt 26-2-98 made therein Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT.C.VANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.VEMURIVENKATESWARA RAO The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per Sri Justice GHULAM MOHAMMED) This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order dated 26.02.1998 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in O.A.No. 1762 of 1997. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant in O.A was promoted as TTS Group-B Officer with effect from 13.7.1983. It is submitted that he joined duty on 5.12.1984 whereas his junior Sri Harnath Babu joined duty as TTS Group-B Officer on 13.7.1984. The grievance of the applicant is that his junior has been given higher scale of pay as Senior S.D.E grade Engineer in the scale of pay of Rs. 2200-4000 and the applicant is also entitled to the same on par with his junior with effect form 31.10.1996. Hence, he preferred O.A seeking a direction to the respondents to consider his case for placement as Senior SDE Grade in the scale of pay of Rs. 2000-4000 with effect from the date on which his junior was given such placement i.e. from 5.12.1996 with all consequential benefits such as arrears of pay, and allowances, seniority etc. The Tribunal after considering the entire material on record, directed the respondents to expedite the case and announce the results of the applicant within a short period preferably within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and the arrears, if any that will arise if he is given higher scale should also be given to him. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that earlier scheme was framed with regard to Group ‘B’ Officers. There are two groups namely, Telegraph Engineers Service (TES) and Telegraph Traffic Service (TTS) and the applicant before the Tribunal belongs to TTS Group. He furnished before the court the proceedings of the Chief General Manger, Telecom, A.P. Circle, Hyderabad dated 26.9.2000 and the letter dated 25th August 2000 issued by the Director (ST-I) having subject “Settlement of issue of merger of Telegraph Traffic Arm group ‘A’ & ‘B’ with Engineering Arm”. In the letter dated August 25th 2000 it is mentioned as under: “Based upon an agreement reached between Department of Telecom Operations, Telegraph Traffic Officers Association and Indian Telecom Service Association, following orders conveying approval of competent authority, on points requiring action by circle are hereby issued.” Further point No.4 of the said letter reads as under: “Lateral advancement scheme is restored retrospectively for TTS group ‘B’ Officers. Other facilities available to TES group ‘B’ Officers like pay scales, post upgradation, pay anomaly settlement and other promotional avenues are applicable to TTS group ‘B’ officers also.” In view of the above facts and circumstances and also in view of the proceedings dated 26.9.2000 issued by the Assistant General Manager (Admn.), for CGM, Telecom as also the letter dated 25th August 2000, we are of the considered view that the relief prayed in the O.A has already been granted by the Department. In this view of the matter, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Writ Petition fails and the same is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J ______________________________ SANJAY KUMAR , J Dt. 12.02.2009 KA ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2 CD copies