IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 27819 of 2007 Between: 1 C. Haranadh, S/o. Late Sri Venkata Chalapathi, of N.U. Guntur, R/o. Brundavan Gardens, Guntur. 2 P. Narasimha Rao, S/o. Sriramam, R/o. Central Excise Colony, Hyderabad - 13. 3 P. Venkatacharylu, S/o. Ramaujacharylu, R/o. Pattabhipuram, Guntur. 4 C. Subbaraydu, S/o. Chenaih, R/o. SVN Colony, Guntur. 5 C. Suvarnaraju, S/o. Pushpanadham, R/o. Guntur. 6 T. Gopalakrishna Reddy, S/o. T. Jayarana Reddy, R/o. Kothapet, Guntur. 7 K.I. Madhusudana Rao, S/o. K. Axel, R/o. Guntur. 8 C. Narayana Rao, S/o. CS Ramalinga Swamy, R/o. Guntur. 9 K. Haumantha Rao, s/o. K. Ramamurthy, R/o. Guntur. 10 Nakkala Rangaiah, S/o. Venkataswamy, R/o. Guntur. 11 D. Dasari, S/o. Ramamma D. R/o. Guntur. 12 K. Lakshminarasimham, S/o. Late V. Gurariah, R/o. Guntur. 13 M. Krishen Ganju, S/o. Amarnath Ganju, R/o. Guntur. 14 N. Lakshmi, W/o. N. Bapa Rao, R/o. Guntur. 15 D. Ramakotaiah, S/o. D. Nagaiah, R/o. Guntur. 16 A. Punna Rao, S/o. Purnaiah, R/o. Guntur. 17 P. Ramamohan Rao, S/o. Ramayya, R/o. Guntur. 18 C. Venkata Raghavulu, S/o. Ranga Rao, R/o. Guntur. 19 BGR Vijaya Rao, S/o. Late B John, R/o. Guntur. 20 S. Veerabhadha Swamy, S/o. Ranga Rao, R/o. Guntur. 21 Ramabhadrasarma Ivatury, S/o. Malikarjuna Rao, R/o. Guntur. 22 N. Anantharamasastry, S/o. Late N. Subbarao, R/o. Guntur. 23 Sundara Ramasastry V. S/o. Late Satyanarayana, R/o. Guntur. 24 S. Gagappa, S/o. S. Venkatappa, R/o. Guntur. 25 G. Satyanandam, S/o. Late Venkata Subhrahmanyam, R/o. Guntur. 26 Venkata Madhusudhana Rao Vasi Reddy, S/o. Koteswara Rao, R/o. Guntur. 27 N. Surya Prakasa Rao, S/o. Narayana Rao, R/o. Guntur. 28 Venkata Gopalkrishnamurthy P. S/o. Subrahmanyam, R/o. Guntur. 29 Y. Kumaraswamy, S/o. Appalaswamy, R/o. Guntur. 30 T. Nirmala, D/o. T. Suryanarayana, R/o. Guntur. 31 Y. Bala Gangadhara Rao, S/o. Bhushaiah, R/o. Guntur. 32 N. Ashirved, S/o. Simano, R/o. Guntur. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Education Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 State of Andhra Pradesh, Finance and Planning Department, Rep. by its Secretary, Secretariat ,Hyderabad. 3 Acharya Nagarjuna University, Rep. by its Registrar, Nagarjuna Nagar, Guntur. ....RESPONDENTS 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 issue any appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of "Writ of Mandamus" (i) Compelling the respondents to fix our and pensionary benefits on actual pay I had drawn on attainaing the age of 60 years counting length of service on the rules issued by the Government and the University, and pay all the arrears upto date with all the consequential reliefs and (ii) to pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner: Smt.M.SHALINI Counsel for the Respondent: The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that the issue that arises for consideration in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by a Judgment of this Court in W.P.No.5968 of 1990, dated 22-7-2002, which was confirmed in Writ Appeal No.1926 of 2002, dated 20-3-2003. Whereas, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-University, has stated that the issue in this Writ Petition is not settled and it is slightly different. Learned counsel has urged that G.O.Ms.Nos.276 and 277, Education Department, dated 2-12-1993 and the Pension Rules of the respondent-University, which clearly state that no Teacher is entitled to count any service rendered after having attained the age of 58 years or any emoluments received thereafter for the purpose of pension, were not taken into consideration by this Court earlier. In fact, being aggrieved by an Order dated 7-11-2003 made in a similar matter i.e. Writ Petition No.18808 of 2003, the University carried the matter in appeal being W.A.No.1951 of 2004 raising the same question, but the Division Bench did not agree with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the University and dismissed the appeal. In the circumstances, I am of the view that no fresh ground is raised to disagree with the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the issue that arises for consideration is squarely covered by a Judgment of this Court in W.P. No.5968 of 1990, dated 22-7-2002, which was confirmed by a Division Bench in Writ Appeal No.1926 of 2002, dated 20-3-2003 as also the Judgment in W.P.No[hc1][hc2].18808 of 2003, which was confirmed in W.A.No.1951 of 2004 on 24-11-2004. Following the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to compute the pension of the petitioners as per the A n d h r a Pradesh Revised Pension Rules,1980, taking into consideration the two years of service rendered by them beyond the age of 58 years and pass appropriate orders, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order and communicate the same to the petitioners. No order as to costs. 29-2-2008 prk [hc1] [hc2]