IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 1081 of 2005 Between: G. Vijayalakshmi, W/o. G. Varada Reddy, BR Government Junior College, Punganur, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Higher Education (IE) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner and Director of Intermediate Education, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3 The Secretary, College Service Commission, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 4 The Regional Joint Director, Kadapa Zone IV, Kadapa District. 5 The Principal, BR Government Junior College, Punganur, Chittoor District. 6 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Finance and Planning Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. .....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 issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for all the connected records including the impugned order passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal in M.A.No. 2474 of 2003 in MASR No. 9549 of 2003 in O.A.No. 1238 of 2000 dated 20-12-2004 and quash the same as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary and contrary to law and further direct the Hon'ble Tribunal to restore the O.A.No. 1238 of 2000 to its Original file and hear the matter the matter on merits and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.RAMAMOHAN-MAHADEVA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following : ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Mr.Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the decision rendered by the Tribunal in M.A.No.2474 of 2003 in M.A.S.R.No.9549 of 2003 in O.A.No.1238 of 2000 dated 20-12-2004 wherein the Tribunal declined to condone the delay of 280 days. The application was filed under Rule 8 (3) of the Administrative Tribunal Act (Procedural) Rules, 1989 praying the Tribunal to set aside the order dated 19-09-2002 and restore the OA. The Tribunal passed the following order: “This Tribunal delivered the judgment on 19-09-2000. The date of filing this MA is 29-07-2003. It is clearly beyond 30 days. Since, it does not come under the purview of the Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 where there is no power to invoke the provisions of Limitation Act as per the orders of the Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No.21734 of 1998 dated 19-11-2003. Hence, the delay of 280 days cannot be condoned and the MA is rejected. Consequently, the MASR is also rejected.” In a reference, the Full Bench of this Court in G.Narasimha Murthy and others v. District Collector, Mahabubnagar and others[1] held that Rule 17 (2) of A.P.A.T. (Procedure) Rules, 1989 so far as “within 30 days from the date of dismissal” are hereby declared as arbitrary, discriminatory, unreasonable, irrational and unconstitutional being violative of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India and the same is hereby struck down. The reference is answered accordingly. In view of the Full Bench judgment of this Court, the writ petition is allowed setting aside the impugned order and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh disposal in accordance with law. No order as to costs. ____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J ____________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J 15th December, 2008 SKM [1] 2006 (3) ALT 433 (F.B.)