@#@#@#@#@#@#@ HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO:13339 of 1995 DATED:20-03-2006 Between: Sri S.R.S.S.P.Rayudu ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Government of A.P., rep.by the Secretary, Department of Education, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others .....RESPONDENTS @#@#@#@#@#@#@ ORAL ORDER: The action of the second respondent-College in not paying arrears of salary to the petitioner is questioned in this writ petition as being illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the guidelines issued by the University Grants Commission. Though several contentions were raised in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, Sri K.L.N.Swamy, learned counsel for the petitioner would, however, restrict his submissions and submit that the second respondent herein had submitted a proposal to the University Grants Commission seeking implementation of the revised pay-scales to teachers working in its College and vide letter dated 09-08-1991 had sought for release of certain additional amounts towards arrears of the revised pay-scales. Learned counsel would refer to the annexure to the said letter dated 09-08-1991 wherein the petitioner’s name is shown at serial No.4 as Lecturer, working from June, 1991 to March, 1992, and a sum of Rs.39,137/- is claimed as amounts to be paid to him towards his salary and other allowances. Learned counsel would submit that despite such a proposal being submitted to the University Grants Commission, and the said amount being received, the second respondent had not paid this amount to the petitioner herein. Sri C.Kodanda Ram, learned counsel for the second respondent, would submit, on instructions, that while the second respondent had indeed submitted proposals to the University Grants Commission and though part of the amount was sanctioned, the second respondent has yet to receive these amounts, and as such, is not in a position to make payment to the petitioner herein. Suffice to state that since the second respondent had claimed the amount from the University Grants Commission, as and when these amounts are received, payment shall be made to the petitioner. Since this is the only contention raised during the course of hearing, the writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. ______________ 20th March, 2006 SKM