IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 7564 of 2008 Between: 1 A.S.N. Prasad S/o A. Gangadhara Rao APSRTC, Hyderabad R/o H. No. 11-13-50, Road No.11 Alkapuri, Hyderabad. 2 K. Venkateswarlu S/o Kondaiah APSRTC, Nellore, R/o H. No. 6-1-14, Sapata Thota Street, Kavali Town, Nellore District. 3 S. Suryanarayana S/o China Veera Raju APSRTC., Hyderabad, r/o h. No. 34-117/E/1, Bharani Colony, Sainikpuri, Secunderabad. 4 S.V.Satyanarayana S/o. Late S.Satyanarayana Murthy APSRTC, Hyderabad R/o H. No. 8-5-141/12-8-12, Mallikharjuna Colony, Bowenpally, Secunderabad. 5 R. Subba rao S/o R. Sita Ramaiah R/o Krishnam Palem, Deverapalli mandal, West Godavari District. 6 P.V.S. Prakash rao S/o P.V. Satyanarayana Rao APSRTC, R/o 1-55-B/203, Akshaya Enclave, Madinaguda, hyderabad. 7 J. Venkata Swamy S/o Jakka Nanjappa, R/o D. No. 13, Srinivasa Enclave, Varadaraja Nagar, Tirupati, Chittoor District. 8 N.S.P. Bhaskara chari S/o late N. Rama Brahmam, APSRTC., Hyderabad. R/o 8-533, Hill Colony, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad. 9 U. Mallaiah S/o Ilaiah ,/o 1-16, Vachunur, Thimmapur Mandal, Karimnagar District. 10 M. Sai Ram Babu S/o Veeraiah , Uppal, Hyderabad, 11 V. Venkata narasimha Rao S/o Venkataharyulu R/o H. No. 2/193, Anjaneya nagar, opp to APSP SPO, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 12 M. Venkata Satyanaryana Murty S/o Rameshwara Rao R/o 4-164-13, Ward No. 1, Ganesh Nagar, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District. 13 R. Satyanarayana S/o Thotaiah R/o D. No. 7-28-23, Mahalakshmi nagar, Road No.3 Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District. 14 D. Ganeswar S/o late D. Satyanarayana R/o H. No. 3-5-302, & 303, Vittalwadi, Naayanaguda, Hyderabad. 15 C.s. Indra Mohan S/o Seethapathi Naidu APSRTC hospital, Tarnaka, R/o A-7, Kakatiya Nagar, Street No.2. Habsiguda, Hyderabad 16 S.V.S.R. Anjaneyulu S/o S.V. Ramakrishna Sastry, R/o H.No. 11-15-219/5, Jinkalabavi Colony, Saroorngar, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Andra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Musheerabad, Hyd. Rep. by its Managing Director. 2 The Provident Fund Organization, rep. by its Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Bhavishyanidi Bhavan, Regional Office, Barrkatpura, Hyderabad. 3 The Assistant Commissioner, Provident Fund Office, Barkatpura, Hyderabad. .....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 a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the action of the respondents 2 & 3 in not taking in to consideration petitioners' option for higher pension as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents 2 & 3 to release the pension at the rate of higher amounts in the Revised pay scales 2005 by issuing Revised Pension payment orders along with 12% interest per annum, basing on the higher options made by the petitioners and to pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.M.VENKAT RAM REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: K.MADHAVA REDDY(SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioners were employed in the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short ‘the Corporation’) and have since retired from service. A Scheme for payment of pension, to its retired employees, was introduced by the Corporation. The petitioners opted to be governed by it and gave their consent for deduction of higher amount of contribution. The Provident Fund Organization, the second respondent herein, undertook to enforce the scheme, duly receiving the contributions. After the petitioners retired from service, their pension was fixed at various amounts. All the petitioners have submitted representations to the respondents herein stating that they are entitled to be paid higher amount of pension. Their grievance is that the representations were not disposed of, as yet, and they are suffering monetary loss. Heard Sri M.Venkatram Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri K.Madhava Reddy, learned counsel for the first respondent and Sri R.N.Reddy, learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3. The purport of the scheme, the extent of contribution made by the petitioners and the formula, at which the pension is to be fixed, are not immediately before this Court. The petitioners have made representations, ventilating their grievance, about the quantum of pension. Inasmuch as the pension is treated as enforceable right and that substantial contribution is made by the petitioners, while in service, the matter cannot brook further delay. The respondents cannot sit over the matter indefinitely and the livelihood of petitioners is very much in stake. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents herein to pass appropriate orders, within a period of two months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, on the representations made by the petitioners. To avoid uncertainty, it is directed that the petitioners shall enclose copies of their representations along with a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ 08.04.2008 Note: Issue cc in one week. (B/o) kdl ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}