P. Santhosh Kumar v. Telangana State Agro Industries Development Corporation Limited
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2020-12-21. P. Santhosh Kumar v. Telangana State Agro Industries Development Corporation Limited. Read the...
Judgment text
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA (Special Original Jurisdiction) IVONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF DECEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION NO: 23284 OF 2020 Between: P. Santhosh Kumar, S/o P. Chakrapani, Aged 58 years, Oce. Retired Employee, '107, R/o. D. No. 8-202, F. No. Prasunanagar, lvadhavi Apartments, Chintal HIVT Post, Chintal, Hyderabad ... PETITIONER AND 1 Telangana State Agro lndustries Development Corporation Limited, Rep. by its Chairman cum l\,4anaging Director, No. 302 and 303, Swarnajayanthi Complex, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. 2 The Accounts Officer, O/o. Telangana State Agro lndustries Development Corporation Limited, No. 302 & 303, Swarnajayanthi Complex, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. 3 M/s. Shriram City Union Finance Limited, Kukatpally Branch, rep. by its Authorized Signatory, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. ...
RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT of IVANDAIVUS declaring the action of the 1st and 2nd respondents in not releasing the retirement benefits of the petitioner on attaining the age of superannuation on 311512020 as arbitrary, illegal, bad in law, violative of Article 19 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to release the retirement benefits viz. , gratuity, provident fund, earned Ieaves etc,, along with interest 1}o/o per annum from lhe date of retirement i. e. , 3110512020 till the date of @ actual payment. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent nos.
1 and 2 to release the retirement benefits viz. , gratuity, provident fund, earned leaves etc. , to the petitioner forthwith. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P. V. L. BHANU PRAKASH Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1&2: SRI BANDA PRASADA RAO, STANDING COUNSEL FOR TSAIDCL. Counsel for the Respondent No. 3: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following: ORDER 'fHE HON'I}LE SIt. I . II. JS-TICE, ABHTNAND KI. INIAIT SIIAVII. ,I WRIT PETITION No. 2 3284 of 2020 ORDER: This writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of both the parties. This writ petition is fi1ed seeking the following relief: ". . . . to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WzuT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the l'1 and 2"'r respondents in not releasing the retirelnent beneflts o1' the petitioner on attaining the age ol superatrnuation on 31. 05.
2020 as arbitrary, illegal, bad in lau', r'iolative ol Articles I9 and 2l of the Constitution o[' Intlia and conscquentll direct the respondent Nos. l and 2 ttr releasc the retirement beneflts viz.. gratuitl . providerrt lirnd, earned leaves etc. , along r. vith interest ! ,i) l8% per annum from the date of retirement i. e.. 3I. 05 2020 till the date ol actual payment and pass such other relief or reliels as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. " Heard Sri P. V. L. Bhanu Prakash, counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Banda Prasada Rao, Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. It has been contended b1" the petitioner that hc rvas rvorking as Driver $ itl-r the l " rcspondent Ciornpanl and u'hiie he $ as itl sen'ice' he stood as sltrety to one Ch. Laxtlan, thc prillcipal borron cr rvho obtained Loan ti. o. -r the 3''r respondcrrt Financc C.. tpan' in thc r cat' l0 I 5.
When the principal borrorver lailed to lepay the loan anloLLrrt' the 3"r lespot. rdent hacl initiatccl proceeclings o1'the Chit l"trnd Act b1 . \KS I \\i I']. No. 2l2lt4 o, 2t)20 filing Arbitration Case being ARC. No. 171 of 201 7 before the sole Arbitrator appointed by the Finance Company. The sole Arbitrator was pleased to pass an award dated 30. 12. 2017 in ARC. No. 171 of 20 17 against the petitioner. Thereafter, the 3'd resporrdent has filed E,. P. No. i2l ol 2018 belore the I-Additional Chief Judge. Ciry Civil CcrLrlt at Sccr-rnderabad. In the said E. P. t,icle orclers clatccl 14. 08. 2019. thc 2"i responclcnt herein r,' as directed to attach tltc salary of the to rur extent lrctitioncr ol Rs. 8,13. 115 -. In pulsuance ol the said olders. an i,uuoullt of Rs. I ,74,033/-, in nine inslalntents, u,as recovcrecl ll'onr the salaly o1- the petitionel ar-rd thereaficr tlte petitioncr rctirccl tl'om service on 3 1 . 05.
2020 on attaining the age of superannuation The glievance ol the petitioner is that due to the attachment orders dated 1;1. 08. 2019 passed in E. P. No. 321 of 2018, respondents Nos. l and 2 arc not releasing the retiral benefits and gratuity amount to the petrtloner. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the glatuitl,'cannot bc attacllcd in ten. ns ol Section 60 ol C. P. C and the respondctrts ctrn lelirnd the balance anroLrnt arrd release other letiral bcnellts incluclins lhc'elatrritl Lo the pc1-itioner in accorclauce u ith lari Standing Counsel appearing lol lesponclent Nos. l and 2 had conicncled that let the iretitioner subr-nit a fi'esh representation to the responclents staking his claim lor release ol retiral beneflls arrd gratuit)' arrount, and thereupon the respondents would consider the sarne and pass appropriate orders in accordance with 1aw. ,\KS,. I -l \\ . j'j. \o 2l2lJ. l Lr1 l020 This Court, having considered the rival subn.
rissions made b),' the counsel for respective pafiies, is ol the considered vien, that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the respondents, staking his claim for release of retiral benefits and gratuity, within two weeks from the date ol receipt of a copy ol this order. Upon such representation being received. thc respondents shall consider the case of the petitioner in tenls ol' Section 60 of CPC and pass appropriatc orclers in another eight lr eclis therea fter. \Vith the abor,'e dircctions, this writ petition is disposecl ol-. Ncr orcle I as to cosLs. Pencling miscellaneor-rs petitions, ilany, shall stand closecl. SD/. K. AMMAJI ASSISTANT REG-ISTRAR /, //TRUE COPY' \\t ,,' SEClffN OFFICER To, 1. The Chairman cum l\4anaging Director, Telangana State Agro lndustries Development Corporation Limited, No. 302 and 303, Swarnajayanthi Complex, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. 2. The Accounts Officer, O/o.
Telangana State Agro lndustries Development Corporation Limited, No. 302 & 303, Swarnajayanthi Complex' Ameerpet, Hyderabad. 3. One CC to Sri. P. V. L. Bhanu Prakash, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri. Banda Prasada Rao, Standing Counsel for TSAIDCL [OPUC] 5. Two C. D. Copies prk HIGH COURT DATED:2'111212020 I 1 H s TA o (, 2021 ORDER 0 5 JAt'l o WP. No. 23284 of 2020 * * s Disposing of the WP. without costs. SN 6 coPleA JF r_\"r I \*{
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.