IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 25720 of 1998 Between: 1 N. Sekhar S/o N. Venkataswamy Office of S.E., Civil Circle-II, Hydel Projects, Srisailama Dam West, Mahabubnagar District. 2 V.V. Phani Mohan S/o V. Eswara Rao B&R Sub Division-I, B&R Division/SLBHES, Srisailama Dam West, Mahabubnagar District,. .. PETITIONERS AND 1 A.P.S.E.B. rep. by its Member Secretary Vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad 2 Chief Engineer (Civil), Hydel Projects, A.P.S.E.B., Srisailam Dam West, Mahabubnagar District. 3 Senior Accounts Officer, SLBHES, Srisailam Dam West, Mahabubnagar District. ...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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ declaring that the action of the Respondents in denying the time scale of pay attached to the post of Assistant Engineers to the petitioners who are on deputation in the post of Asst. Engineers in the service of the first Respondent Board, is arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct the Respondents to allow the benefit of time scale of pay attached to the post of Asst. Engineer for all that period during which the services of the petitioners are utilised by the Respondent Board including arrears and grant such other reliefs as it deems fit in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.VENKATARAMANA Counsel for the Respondents: P.R.BALARAMI REDDY (SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court made the following : O R D E R : In this writ petition, the petitioners, who were working as Assistant Engineers, on deputation, in the first respondent-Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board (Board), seek directions by way of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in denying them the time-scale of pay attached to the post of Assistant Engineer in the first respondent- Board as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners were appointed as Assistant Engineers by the Roads and Buildings Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh and they were sent to the Board on deputation. It is stated by the petitioners that though their initial deputation period in the Board was only for one year, but however, their deputation period was being extended from time to time. The grievance of the petitioners is that though they were deputed to the Board in the post of Assistant Engineers and were working as such in the Board, but however, the scales of pay, which are attached to the said post in the Board, are not being extended to them. In the representations filed by the petitioners, which are referred to in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is stated that the Assistant Engineers of the Board were being paid in the time-scale of pay of Rs.3550-150-4600-170-6470, whereas the pay scale of the petitioners is Rs.3110-90-3200-110-3750-130-4400-160-5200-190- 6150-230-6380. It is stated that there is a difference of more than Rs.1000/- and as much as they are discharging similar functions of Assistant Engineers of the Board, they are entitled to the same scale of pay as long as they continue their deputation in the Board. Though the writ petition was filed in the year 1998, when the petitioners were deputed to the Board, but however, it has to be noted that during the pendency of the writ petition, the activities of the Board were divided and several other distribution companies were formed. Each company is an independent company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act. Though companies were formed long back, no steps have been taken for amendment of the cause title. Further, it is also not known whether the petitioners are presently working or not. When the same is questioned, learned counsel for the petitioners stated that he has no information regarding the same and seeks permission for withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh writ petition. Though it is stated in the writ affidavit, filed in the year 1998, that the deputation period of the petitioners in the Board was being extended from time to time, but it is not clear as to whether they are at present continuing in the deputation post in any of the newly formed distribution companies or they were repatriated to their parent department. As much as the distribution company, in which the petitioners are presently working on deputation, is not got impleaded, leaving it open to the petitioners to file a fresh writ petition by impleading necessary parties, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed. No order as to costs. ____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY,J Dated 16th April, 2008 vrn ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 A.P.S.E.B. rep. by its Member Secretary Vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad 2 Chief Engineer (Civil), Hydel Projects, A.P.S.E.B., Srisailam Dam West, Mahabubnagar District. 3 Senior Accounts Officer, SLBHES, Srisailam Dam West, Mahabubnagar District. 4 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{JPK}