IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 4561 of 2008 Between: 1 The Head Master ZPHS Phangiri, Thirumalagir(M) Nalgonda Dist 2 The Parishad Educational Officer Z.P Nalgonda, Nalgonda Dist Nalgonda 3 The Commissioner & Director of School Education A.P.Hyderabad 4 The Govt. of A.P Rep. by its Secretary Education Department Secretariat, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 S.Jaya Prakash Retd. Gr-I Hindi Pandit,R/o.Thungathurthy Post &(M) Nalgonda Dist 2 Accountant General of A.P Hyderabad 3 Sub Treasurey Officer Thungathurthy(M) Nalgonda Dist .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of "Writ of Certiorari" calling for the records relating to and connected with the order in O.A No.359/2007 dt 01-03-2007 on the file of the Hon'ble A.P Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad and to quash or set aside the same by holding as erroneous and contrary to law and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:GP FOR SERVICES I Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the order dated 01.03.2007 passed in O.A. No. 359 of 2007 by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, and to set aside the same holding it to be erroneous, the petitioner filed this writ petition. The respondent herein filed the above OA seeking a direction to the petitioners herein to refund an amount of Rs.2,12,087/- recovered from the pensionary benefits of the respondent herein, in terms of the judgment in O.A.No.4816 of 2000 dated 17.1.2004 and OA No. 4736 of 2000 dated 19.11.2003 and OS No. 32 of 2006 dated 5.5.2006. The respondent was appointed as Grade II Hindi Pandit in the scale of 130-240 with effect from 4.10.1971, though he was fully qualified and eligible to hold the post in the scale of 130-250. Therefore, when the said scale was not given to him, he filed RP No.1667/1984 before the Tribunal, which was disposed of on 27.11.1984. Since the said order passed by the Tribunal was not implemented, the respondent and others filed WP No. 13906 of 1988. Thereafter, the respondent was awarded revised scales from time to time inclusive of Revised Pay Scales, 1993, though Act 14 of 1991 viz., Andhra Pradesh Educational Service Untrained Teachers (Regulation of Services and Fixation of Pay) Act, 1991, was in existence. It is further case of the respondent before the Tribunal that since he was denied the benefit of Revised Pay Scales, 1999 vide order in Lr.No.E2/2982/2000/ZP dated 30.03.2000 on the ground that Act 14 of 1991 gets attracted, despite the fact that the Act does not apply in the case of Language Pandits, the respondent OA No. 11640 of 2002, which was disposed of on 21.6.2004 following the judgment in OA No. 4816 of 2000 27.1.2004 with a direction to release the Revised Pay Scales of 1999 to the respondent. However, the Revised Pay Scales, 1999 were not awarded to him and in the month of May, 2006, he retired on attaining superannuation. Accordingly, pension proposals were submitted without fixing the pay of the respondent in the Revised Pay Scales, 1999 and the Accountant General, has addressed to the first petitioner, that as per the entry in records, an amount of Rs.2,12,087/- has to be recovered from Gratuity towards excess pay and allowance. Accordingly, the first respondent submitted revised proposals to effect recovery of the said sum and the Accountant General has released the pension after deducting the said sum on 31.1.2007, without intimation to the respondent or any notice to him. The Tribunal, by the order, which is impugned in this writ petition, has allowed the O.A. holding that the matter is covered by the orders passed in OA No. 4736 of 2000 dated 19.11.2003. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed by the petitioner. The learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the matter is not covered by the judgment in OA No. 4736 of 2000 dated 19.11.2003 inasmuch as the findings of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in OA Nos. 50430-50441/1991, etc. holding that Act 14 of 1991 is held to be not violative of provisions of Constitution of India, and hence, the respondent is not entitled to receive the revised salary and, therefore, recovery for the excess drawal has been ordered. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the lis in the present O.A No. 359 of 2007 is covered by the decision in O.A. No. 4736 of 2000 dated 19.11.2003. There is no dispute that the said order made in O.A. No. 4736 of 2000 has become final. The affidavit filed in support of the writ petition is conspicuously silent in that regard. That apart, the contention of the respondent that no notice was effected on him prior to passing of the order deducting a sum of Rs.2,12,087/-, is not rebutted by the petitioners. For these reasons, we do not find any justifiable ground to interfere with the impugned order. Consequently, the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. No order as to costs. ____________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J. __________________ G.CHANDRAIAH, J. March 10, 2008 MAS.