THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION Nos.12741 of 1998 &11352 of 2003 Dated 29-01-2008 W.P.No.12741 of 1998 Between: Dr.K.V.L.Kameswari. ..... PETITIONER AND Andhra University, rep. By its Registrar, Visakhapatnam & others. .....RESPONDENTS W.P.No.11352 of 2003 Between: Dr.K.V.L.Kameswari. ..... PETITIONER AND Andhra University, rep. By its Registrar, Visakhapatnam & others. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION Nos.12741 of 1998 &11352 of 2003 COMMON ORDER: While detailed submissions have been made on merits by Sri N.C.Das, learned counsel for the petitioner, it is wholly unnecessary for this Court to examine these contentions in view of the fair submission made by Sri M.V.Raja Ram, learned standing counsel for the respondent-University, that pursuant to a revision in remuneration payable to candidates, who possessed the qualification of P.HD, such candidates are entitled to be paid Rs.10,000/- per month. Learned standing counsel would fairly submit that, from the date on which the enhanced remuneration was brought into force, the petitioner shall be paid the enhanced remuneration. Learned standing counsel would also submit that the petitioner is now being continued in service and that the respondent-University has no intention to dispense with her services. He would contend that it is only in view of the ban on recruitment that the respondent-University is not in a position to make appointment on a regular basis and that, as soon as the ban is lifted, the respondent-University will submit proposals to the Government to fill up the vacancies and, on sanction being accorded, the respondent-University would take necessary steps to fill up the posts in accordance with law. Learned standing counsel would submit that till the posts are filled up on a regular basis, the petitioner shall be continued on fixed remuneration. While learned Government Pleader for Higher Education would contend that there is no ban in force, I do not consider it necessary to examine this aspect. Suffice to hold that, in addition to payment of enhanced monthly remuneration of Rs.10,000/- to the petitioner from the date on which such enhanced remuneration was made applicable to candidates who possessed P.HD qualifications, the respondent- University shall take steps to fill up the posts on a regular basis, in case the ban is lifted, by obtaining necessary sanction in this regard. Till regular appointments are made, the petitioner shall be continued in service as a teaching assistant on enhanced remuneration. Sri M.V.Raja Ram, learned standing counsel for the respondent-University, would contend that the petitioner has abstained from duty. This fact is disputed by Sri N.C.Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned standing counsel would, however, seek liberty of this Court to take disciplinary action for such unauthorized absence from duty. Leaving it open to the respondent- University, if it so chooses, to take disciplinary action for the misconduct of unauthorized absence, the writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. No costs. ______________ 29-01-2008 usd