Superintending Engineer And Ors vs B. Degaiah And Ors

Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ

We have heard learned Govt. Pleader for Services-III for the appellants and Mr. S. Satyanarayana Rao, learned counsel for the respondents/writ petitioners.

This Writ Appeal is presented against the order dated 26.09.2019 passed in W.P.No.14744 of 2019, whereby the learned single Judge disposed of the Writ Petition by directing the respondents to release the increments of the writ petitioners pertaining to the minimum time scale of pay by extending Memo No.17025/30/2018-Estt-I dated 09.03.2019.

It is submitted that no opportunity was granted to the appellants to file counter-affidavit contesting the averments made in the Writ Petition. It is also submitted that the writ petitioners are not similarly situated with the petitioners in W.P.No.26788 of 2017, on which reliance was placed by the learned single Judge and the learned single Judge has also not addressed as to how the judgment rendered in W.P.No.26788 of 2017 is applicable to the facts of the case presented by the writ petitioners.

The conclusion derived for issuing direction as noted earlier is recorded in paragraph 3 of the impugned order, which reads as follows:

"3. The learned counsel for the petitioners straight away draws the attention of this Court to the judgment, dated 10.08.2017 of the Hon'ble High court of Judicature at Hyderabad, passed in W.P.No.26788 of 2017, wherein the Court held that the petitioners, who have extended for minimum time scale, are entitled to addition of increments from time to time in minimum time scale without being entitled to all other allowances."

A bare perusal of the above paragraph as well as the order under assailment would go to show that the learned single Judge did not discuss as to how the judgment dated 10.08.2017 passed in W.P.No.26788 of 2017 is attracted in the present case. There is no finding that the writ petitioners in W.P.No.14744 of 2019 are similarly situated with those in W.P.No.26788 of 2017. In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the impugned order cannot be sustained in law. We, however, hasten to add that we have expressed no opinion on the merits of the case.

As a result of the foregoing discussion, the impugned order is set aside. The Writ Appeal is allowed and the case is remanded to the learned single Judge for disposal. Registry will list the Writ Petition before the appropriate single Bench having roster, on 19.04.2021. The appellants may file counter-affidavit on or before 19.04.2021 and if no counter-affidavit is filed before the said date, no further opportunity shall be granted to the appellants to file counter-affidavit. No order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.