THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANRAIAH W.P.NO.1581 OF 1996 O R D E R This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay the salaries and emoluments to the petitioner and accord all consequential beneﬁts such as arrears of salaries, seniority and promotion and further award bank rate of interest on the arrears of salary due and payable to the petitioner. 2. In the aﬃdavit ﬁled in support of the writ petition it is stated that the petitioner was appointed in the year 1977 as S.G.B.T. teacher in the 4 th respondent - Maruthi Upper Primary School, Secunderabad, which is represented by its Head Mistress and the said School is an aided school. Owing to the mismanagement of the school as per the report of the Deputy Educational Oﬃcer, Secunderabad Zone in Lr.Rc.No.538/11/92 dated 3.6.1993 to the District Educational Oﬃcer, Hyderabad, the Director of School Education, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad – 1st respondent, vide proceedings in Rc.No.1507/D-1-2/94 dated 4.8.1995 ordered transfer of the petitioner and the District Educational Oﬃcer, Hyderabad – 2nd respondent, issued consequential proceedings in Rc.No.150/E1/94 dated 13.9.1995. Pursuant to the said orders of transfer, the petitioner was transferred from the 4th respondent – School to the 3rd respondent – Mahaboob College High School, Secunderabad through proceedings in Rc.No.160/E1/94 dated 7.1.1995. Thereupon the petitioner joined duty in the 3rd respondent – school, on 20.9.1995 and the 3rd respondent school vide letter No.PO/1999/MCHS dated 16.10.1995, directed the petitioner to furnish the documents viz., (1) original service book, relieving order, last pay certiﬁcate, original qualiﬁcation certiﬁcates (a) professional (b) academic and teaches provident fund account pass book with update entries, to enable to claim the petitioner’s salary. Now the grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of repeated requests to the management of the 4th respondent – school, the Head Mistress of the said school is illegally withholding the documents and the petitioner also made representations to the oﬃcials on 1.1.1995 and 13.12.1995, but they are of no avail and this resulted in withholding of the salary payable to the petitioner and thus she is being paid consolidated amount of Rs.5000/-. Her grievance is that she is made to work without salary and other emoluments, which she is entitled to, since August, 1995 and that she is facing untold hardship. Therefore, she filed the present writ petition. 3. Though the writ petition is of the year 1996, no counter affidavit is filed. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was appointed in the year 1977 as SGBT teacher in an aided post in the 4th respondent – school, which is an aided institution and owing the mismanagement of the 4th respondent – school, she was transferred to the 3rd respondent – school, but the management of the 3rd respondent school, illegally withheld the relevant documents referred to in the writ petition and this resulted in denying the salary to the petitioner, which she is entitled to, as per the rules. He further submitted that the petitioner is the senior most teacher in the 3rd respondent – school and is in-charge of distribution of salary to other teachers who are juniors to her, as per the scales which are ﬁxed from time to time, but she is getting only a consolidated amount of about Rs.5,000/- and that she is due for retirement by the end of October, 2008. Therefore, he sought to pass appropriate orders directing the respondents to pay salary, arrears and other emoluments, which the petitioner is legally entitled to, by fixing her scale. 5. The Government Pleader for School Education is not present and there is no representation on his behalf. 6. From the material on record, it could be seen that the petitioner was appointed as S.G.B.T. teacher in the 4th respondent – School, which was an aided institution. From a perusal of the report submitted by the Deputy Educational Oﬃcer, Secundeabad Zone, Secunderabad to the 2nd respondent – District Educational Oﬃcer, Hyderabad in Lr.Rc.No.538/B/92 dated 3.6.1993, it could be seen that the petitioner is shown as working in the 4th respondent school as SGBT teacher and further as the management of the school was indulging in maintaining duplicate attendance register showing higher strength than the existing strength and as the strength is uneconomic and the management of the school is making underpayment to the teaches for the last many years and is not interested in improving the school and also as there were no facilities in the school for teaches and students, the Deputy Educational Oﬃcer suggested that the Correspondent of the school may be asked to close the school and that the teachers rendered surplus, may be proposed to be transferred to the vacant posts in other aided schools. In the said report, the vacancies of teachers existing in diﬀerent schools was shown and the 3rd respondent is shown as one of the schools, where one post of SGBT teacher was vacant. Further the District Educational Oﬃcer, Hyderabad vide his letter in Rc.No.150/Et/94 dated 7.1.1995 addressed to the Director of School Education, A.P., Hyderabad stated that there is work load at the 3 rd respondent – school, as there are 21 sections and only 17 SGBT teacher are working and three post of SGBT are vacant and hence there is need for additional SBGT post and requested the Director that the petitioner who is working as SBGRT UPS Secundeabad may be transferred to 3rd respondent – School along with post and provision for which the Correspondent has given consent. Subsequently, the District Educational Oﬃcer, Hyderabad District by proceedings in Rc.No.150/E1/94 dated 13.9.1995 considering the orders of the Directors in Proceedings in DSE Rc.No.1507/D1-2/94 dated 4.8.1995 and also considering the circumstances reported by the correspondent of the 3rd respondent – school in his letter dated 9.8.1995, transferred the petitioner who is working as SGBT in the 4th respondent - school to the existing vacancy in the 3rd respondent – school and further instructed the management of the 4th respondent – school not to utilize the post held by the petitioner in the 4th respondent school and further informed that the orders regarding surrender or transfer of post and provision of the said SGBT post in the 4th respondent – school to other needy school, will be issued separately. Pursuant to her transfer, the petitioner joined duty on 20.9.1995 and by proceedings No.PO/1999/MCH dated 16.10.1995, the Principal of the 3rd respondent – school college instructed the petitioner to submit the original service register, relieving order, last pay certiﬁcate, original qualiﬁcation certiﬁcates (a) professional and (b) academic and TPF pass book with up-to-date entries to submit the same to the higher authorities to enable them to claim salary of the petitioner. Now the grievance of the petitioner is that, as the Headmistress of the 4th respondent – school did not issue said documents, she is not paid the salary, which she is entitled to and now she is being paid consolidated salary of about Rs.5,000/- and that she is due for retirement by the end of October, 2008 and further the petitioner also made representations on 11.11.1995 and 134.12.1995, but no appropriate orders redressing the grievance of the petitioner were passed. 7. In view of the above facts and circumstances and having regard to the proceedings issued by the oﬃcial respondents 1 and 2, I am of the view that the withholding the documents by the management of the 4th respondent – school is not justiﬁed and consequently the oﬃcial respondents are also not justiﬁed in not disposing of the representations of the petitioner dated 11.11.1995 and 13.12.1995 by ﬁxing her scale and pay the salary and other emoluments including the arrears, which the petitioner is entitled to. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of with the following direction: “The respondents 1 and 2 shall consider the case of the petitioner keeping in view the proceedings referred to above and also the necessary record and pass appropriate orders on the claim of the petitioner with regard to regularization of her services and ﬁxation of the pay scale attached to the post held by her and pay all the consequential beneﬁts arising there from, in accordance with law, within a period two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. AVS ------------------------------- - 17—09--2008