THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI Writ Petition No. 21660 of 2000 Dated: 25.11.2010 Between: Y.Munikrishnaiah, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Government of A.P., Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Hyderabad and another. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI Writ Petition No. 21660 of 2000 ORDER: This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the 1st respondent in not considering the petitioner’s case to extend the pay protection on par with his juniors in terms of the orders issued by the Government in G.O.R.T.No.1185 Revenue (Endts.III) Department dated 08.07.1997 as well as G.O.R.T.No.502 Revenue (Endts.III) Department dated 01.04.1999 is arbitrary and illegal. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent. As could be seen, proposals made by the 2nd respondent vide proceedings dated 01.08.1999 with regard to the petitioner’s request for pay protection on par with one A.S.Venkatgeswarlu and B.Ramachandraiah was rejected by the 1st respondent vide memo dated 22.12.1999. It is the specific case of the petitioner that as per the report of the Pay Revision Commission and the recommendations of the Pay Anomaly Sub-Committee, number of Superintendents in TTD including juniors to the petitioner were continued the protection from pay anomalies and that there is no justifiable reason for not extending the said benefit to the petitioner. Despite notice, no counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the 1st respondent explaining the reasons for not extending the said benefit to the petitioner. Even the impugned order is bereft of any reasons and it was merely stated that the 2nd respondent’s proposal was not feasible for compliance. The law is well settled that absence of reasons is one of the grounds for judicial review since the failure to assign reasons would result in violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, the order of the 1st respondent dated 22.12.1999 is liable to be set aside on that ground alone. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 22.12.1999 is hereby set aside and the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to reconsider the claim of the petitioner for rectification of the pay anomaly on par with his juniors and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. _____________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 25.11.2010 KLP