IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7124 of 2009 Between: 1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Buildings, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Director of School Education, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Sri N. Balakrishnaiah, Z.P. High School, Ghattu, Mahabubnagar District, R/o. 2-1-283, Plot No. 101, Sai Vishnu Apartments, Nallakunta, Hyderabad. 2 Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Mahabubnagar. (2nd Respondent is a formal party no relief is sought against him). .....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 directino more particularly are in the nature of WRIT OF CERTIORARI calling for the records relating to and connected with the order in O.A.No. 8283/1998, 15-02-2000 on the file of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and to quash ror set aside the same by holding as erroneous and contrary to law and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:GP FOR SERVICES I Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY W.P.No.7124 of 2009 ORDER: (Per B.SESHASAYANA REDDY J) This writ petition has been filed by the respondents in O.A.No.8283 of 1998 assailing the order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal passed on 15.02.2000. The first respondent herein was selected by the District Selection Committee, Zilla Parishad, Mahbubnagar and was appointed by the Zilla Parishad as S.G.B.T.Teacher. Pursuant to the appointment order, he joined as S.G.B.T. Teacher on 27.09.1961. He remained absent from 23.04.1976. He claims to have submitted joining report by making representation, dated 22.05.1980. The respondents had not passed orders on his representation. In the meanwhile, he attained the age of superannnuation. He filed O.A.No.8283 of 1998 under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 assailing the action of the authorities in not paying the provisional pension. The Tribunal while admitting the O.A., passed an interim order directing the authorities to pay provisional pension in accordance with the rules expeditiously. Despite the interim order, the authorities did not pay the provisional pension. The Tribunal by order, dated 15.02.2000 disposed of the O.A. directing the authorities to pay the provisional pension as provided under Rule 52 of the A.P. (Revised) Pension Rules, 1980 (for short ‘the Rules’). The said order is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the first respondent. 3. The learned Government Pleader for Service I submits that the first respondent remained absent from 23.04.1976 and therefore, he is not entitled for any provisional pension. A further submission is made that the delay in filing of the writ petition challenging the order, dated 15.2.2000 has occurred because of some administrative reasons. 4. A fact remains that the respondent worked as S.G.B.T. Teacher from 27.09.1961 to 22.04.1976. Even assuming that the first respondent remained unauthorized absent, it seems no finality attained with regard to the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him. The first respondent retired from service on attaining age of superannuation. Rule 52 of the Rules, reads as under: “Provisional pension where departmental or judicial proceeding may be pending:- (1)(a) In respect of a Government servant referred to In sub rule (4) of Rule 9, the Audit Officer/Head of Office shall pay the provisional pension not exceeding the maximum pension which would have been admissible on the basis of qualifying service up to the date of retirement of the Government servant” 5. The Tribunal having noticed Rule 52 of the Rules proceeded to dispose of the O.A. directing the authorities to pay provisional pension. We do not see any flaw in the order passed by the Tribunal warranting interference by this court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed at the admission stage. No order as to costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J _______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY,J 07.04.2009 Stp ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}