IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 25678 of 2005 Between: V.Narasimhamurthy, S/o.Sarweswara Rao, R/o.Plot No.45, House No.6-296/a Aeronatic Enclave, Hyderabad-54. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Pay Officer, APTRANSCO, Vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad. 2 Additional Secretary, APTRANSCO, vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an order, direction or writ one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action fo the respondents in denying the beneﬁt to stepup the pay of Senior in the revised SGP.SAPP scales drawing less than Junior in revised ordinary/Special Grade Post Scale with eﬀect from 198 revised payscale and consequentially (i) direct the respondents to implement the proceedings of Additional Secretary APTRANSCO dt.30.8.1999 No DGM(I.R)/AS- Reg.Sec.2/A1 163/99-I (ii) Award the costs of this writ petition and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.D.V.V.RAMANA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: P.R.BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition has been filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in denying the beneﬁt to step up the pay of senior in the revised SGP/SAPP scales drawing less than junior in revised pay Ordinary/Special Grade Post scale with eﬀect from 1998 revised pay scales and consequently to direct the respondents to implement the proceedings of Additional Secretary APTRANSCO dated 30-08-1999 DGM(I.R)/AS- Reg/Reg.Sec.2/A1/163/99-I. The case of the petitioner is that he was working as Assistant Divisional Engineer in the Oﬃce of the Chief Engineer/Grid Operation, Vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad. As on 01-04-1998 he was in the post of ADE (SGP gr.) and his junior (R. Vishnu Murthy) in the same cadre of ADE (ORD gr.) was getting more pay in the ordinary grade post. Due to certain variations and anomalies, which arose while implementing the revision of pay scale 1998, the Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh issued an order dated 30-08-1998, for regulation of such variations and anomalies stating that if the pay of the Senior is ﬁxed in the revised SGP/SPP/SAPP Scales is less than pay ﬁxed to the Junior in revised ordinary/Special grade post scale, the pay of the Senior shall be stepped up on par with the pay of the Junior with eﬀect from 01-04-1998, duly following other pay fixation principles of 1996 scale and increments regulated. The case of the petitioner is that as per the said memo he is entitled to step up of pay on par with his junior. It is also his case that he made several representations to the Pay Oﬃcer, APTRANSCO seeking the said relief to implement the memo issued by the APTRANSCO. He also speciﬁcally stated that he made a representation to the General Manager APTRANSCO dated 06-02-2002 and to the Pay Oﬃcer APTRANSCO dated 03-03-2004 and 13-04-2004. Thereafter he made another representation dated 24-04-2004 but the respondent did not respond. Therefore, he filed the present writ petition. Transmission Corporation of A.P., Vidyut Soudha, issued Memo dated 30-08-1999 directing that the pay ﬁxations in the revision of pay scales, 1998 in the cases referred in the said Memo, shall be regulated as per the rectifications mentioned in the said Memo. It appears that the beneﬁt conferred under the said Memo is not provided to the petitioner. The petitioner made several representations, particularly representation dated 06-02-2002 to the General Manager (Personnel) APTRANSCO, Vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad wherein it is stated that his junior one Sri K. Vishnu Murthy, was getting more pay than him. Therefore, he requested the General Manager to arrange to protect his pay on par with his junior who has drawn a pay of Rs.16,900/- basic in the month of April, 1998 and to issue suitable orders for implementation as per the illustration-I of Memo dated 30-08-1999 and the subsequent amendment under the Memo dated 10-11-1999. Thereafter, the petitioner made representations dated 03-03-2004 and 13-04-2004 to the Pay Oﬃcer, APTRANSO requesting to step up his pay on par with that of Sri K. Vishnu Murthy, ADE (Elecl) as per the directives issued by the Additional Secretary/ APTRANSCO vide Memos dated 30-08-1999 and 10-11-1999 but no orders have been passed so far. Therefore, he was constrained to file the present writ petition. The main grievance of the petitioner is that his junior is drawing more pay than him. The petitioner made several representations, particularly representation dated 03-03- 2004 and 13-04-2004 and though in the counter aﬃdavit it is stated by the respondents that the case of the petitioner was examined and issued necessary proceedings vide letter No.POG2/ARF-5/D.No.1252/2004, dated 26-05-2004 but this Court had no opportunity to look into the contents of the same, as the same is not placed before this Court. Therefore, appropriate direction needs to be given to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner, in the interest of justice. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that without going into the merits of the case this writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders on the representations dated 03-03-2004 and 13-04-2004 made by the petitioner. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH Date: 11-07-2008 LSK