THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.NO. 21440 OF 2009 Date of Disposal: 8.10.2009 Between: Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Secretary, School Educational Department, Hyderabad …Petitioner And A Jagannatha Rao and others …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.NO. 21440 OF 2009 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V. Eswaraiah) 1. The Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Secretary, School Education, Hyderabad has filed this writ petition questioning the order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in OA No. 6456 of 2004, dated 2.8.2007. Parties are being referred to as they are arrayed in OA. 2. OA No. 6456 of 2004 was filed by the applicant seeking a direction to the respondents including the writ petitioner herein to grant and release full commutation of pension to him along with interest @ 12% P.A. on the delayed payment of pensionary benefits from the date of retirement till the date of realisation. The said OA was allowed by the impugned order of the Tribunal. 3. The undisputed facts are that while the applicant was working as a teacher, he was dismissed from service. He challenged the said dismissal order before the Tribunal vide OA No. 7634 of 1998. The Tribunal by its order dated 18.11.1998 set aside the said dismissal order, giving liberty to the respondents to consider the explanation of the applicant, give an opportunity to him and then pass an appropriate order. Pending passing of appropriate order, the respondents were directed to pay the provisional pension to the applicant. It is stated that pursuant to the said order of the Tribunal, dated 18.11.1998 in OA No. 7634 of 1998, the respondents passed an order on 23.1.2008 sanctioning commutation of pension to the applicant. The aforesaid order of the Tribunal, dated 18.11.1998 in OA No. 7634 of 1998 has become final and the applicant was reinstated into service and he retired from service without any further enquiry. The fact remains that no further action was taken against the applicant and he was allowed to retire from service. Therefore the applicant is entitled for release of pensionary benefits and for non-payment of pensionary benefits, he has filed the present OA No. 6456 of 2004. The said OA was allowed by the impugned order of the Tribunal. 4. The writ petitioner i.e., Government of A.P. represented by its Secretary, Education Department, Hyderabad is the 1st respondent, Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Srikakulam is the 2nd respondent and Accountant Gneral, Hyderabad is the 3rd respondent in the said OA. Since no counter was filed by them even after three years, the said OA was allowed by the Tribunal holding that the case pertains to a pensioner who is aged 68 years old and in view of the background of the case and when the averments in OA remained unrebutted and the respondents were directed to release full commutation pension to the applicant with interest @ 12% P.A. on the delayed payment of the pensionary benefits from the date of retirement till the date of realisation with all consequential and attendant benefits. The respondents were given eight weeks’ time to comply with the said order and on failure to do so, costs of Rs.5,000/- was directed to be paid by the respondents to the applicant. 5. It may be noted here that questioning the very self same order of the Tribunal in OA No. 6456 of 2004, dated 2.8.2007, the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Srikakulam-2nd respondent in OA, has previously filed WP No. 20349 of 2007 and another Division Bench of this Court dismissed the said writ petition on 29.10.2007 holding that the Tribunal was justified in passing the impugned order which needed no interference by this Court. Learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for writ petitioner submits that the delay in payment of pensionary benefits had not occurred due to the negligence of the respondents and the rule position with regard to payment of interest on the delayed pension was not brought to the notice of earlier Division Bench of this Court and in fact no counter was filed bringing the same to the notice of the Tribunal also. As the order of the Tribunal was already confirmed by the earlier Division Bench of this Court , we are not inclined to deal with the said contention and express any opinion with regard to interest on the delayed payment of pensionary benefits and also whether the delay was actually caused on account of negligence of respondents. In this view of the matter, the present writ petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. 6. Learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the writ petitioner further submits that the writ petitioner may be granted some reasonable time to comply with the order of the Tribunal. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, the time stipulated by the Tribunal for compliance of its order is extended by further six weeks from today. However, there shall be no order as to costs. ________________ V. ESWARAIAH J. Dt. 8.10.2009 KR _________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR J. NB: CC of order be furnished in one week. /BO/