HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.12284 of 2007 DATE:01.06.2010 Between: K. Mohd. Shareef ... Petitioner and Central Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd., rep. by its Superintending Engineer (Operation), Kurnool and another ... Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.12284 of 2007 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not releasing the terminal benefits of the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary, to set aside the letter No.AAO/ERO/NDL/JAO- I/Estt./D.No.1624/06, dated 09.10.2006, issued by the 2nd respondent, and consequently, to direct the respondents to release the terminal benefits of the petitioner including pension and gratuity with interest, with effect from 01.08.2003 duly treating his qualifying service as 33 years 5 months and 13 days. Heard both sides. It appears that during the course of his employment in the respondent-organisation, the petitioner was dismissed from service, by an order dated 26.06.1990. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed W.P.No.11229 of 1991 before this Court and the same was allowed setting aside the order of dismissal dated 26.06.1990, leaving it open to the respondents to modify the penalty. Challenging the same, the respondents herein filed W.A.No.1410 of 1995. However, the same was dismissed on 09.11.1995. Subsequently, the petitioner was reinstated into service on 09.01.1996 and having worked for some time, he took voluntary retirement on medical grounds, with effect from 01.08.2003. According to the petitioner, for the purpose of terminal benefits, only 21 years and 5 months of service was taken into consideration, whereas he had completed 33 years 5 months and 13 days of service, which is arbitrary and illegal. According to him, W.P.No.11229 of 1991 filed by him was allowed setting aside the order of dismissal dated 26.06.1990 with a direction to the respondents to pass orders on the show cause notice dated 28.02.1989. Pursuant thereto, the Superintendent Engineer, Operation Circle, Vijayawada, passed an order dated 31.08.1996. Paras 11 to 13 of the said order read as under: 11. In view of the above, the Superintendent Engineer, Operation, Vijayawada, has decided to confirm the punishment of reduction of the pay of Sri K.Md. Shariff, LDC to themaximum of the time scale to which he was rcruited (i.e.) LDC for a period of 5 years with postponement of future increments for the same period against Sri K.Md. Shariff, LDC besides treating the period of suspension as suspension limiting to the subsistence allowance. 12. Accordingly, it is ordered that the pay of Sri K.Md.Shariff, LDC be reduced to the minimum of the time scale to which he was recruited (i.e.) LDC for a period of 5 (five) years with postponement of future increments for the same period from the date of receipt of this order besides treating the period of suspension from 11.2.87 AN to 8.1.96 AN a suspension limiting to the subsistence allowance. 13. Sri K.Md.Shariff, LDC is informed that only one appeal lies with the Chief Engineer, Vijayawada Zone, Vijayawada, as per Regulation 16 of APSEB Employees Discipline and Appeal Regulations within three months from the date of receipt of this order, if he prefers it. From a reading of the above order, it would indicate that the respondents have imposed punishment of reduction of pay of the petitioner to the minimum of time scale for a period of five years with postponement of future increments for the same period from the date of receipt of the said order and the period of suspension from 11.02.1987 to 08.01.1996 was treated as suspension limiting to the subsistence allowance. That means, the petitioner's service was trated as continuous, but he was not paid full allowances for the said period. Thus, it must be deemed that the petitioner's service was continuous from the date of his appointment till the date of his retirement on voluntary basis. Therefore, denial of the period from 11.02.1987 to 08.01.1996 by the respondents for the purpose of retirement benefits is ex facie illegal. The respondents could not have treated that the petitioner has rendered only 21 years and 5 months of service. In fact, the petitioner has rendered 33 years 5 months and 13 days of service. The service rendered by the petitioner was never denied for any purpose in the order passed by the Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle, Vijayawada, dated 31.08.1996. In the light of the above, I am of the opinion that the respondents have acted arbitrarily in paying terminal benefits to the petitioner only for the period of 22 years and 5 months instead of 33 years 5 months and 13 days. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the letter No.AAO/ERO/NDL/JAO-I/Estt./D.No.1624/06, dated 09.10.2006, issued by the 2nd respondent, is set aside. The respondents are hereby directed to treat the entire period of 33 years 5 months and 13 days of service of the petitioner for the purpose of terminal benefits and release the same to the petitioner, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________ C.V. RAMULU, J 1st June, 2010 CBS HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.12284 of 2007 (Allowed) 1st June, 2010 CBS