Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Telangana
  4. /
  5. 2010
  6. /
  7. January

Jawaharlalnehru Technological University

High Court Of Telangana|24 June, 2010
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI WRIT PETITION No. 7287 OF 2010 Thursday, the Twenty Fourth day of June, Two Thousand and Ten Between C.Vonnur Reddy Petitioner AND JawaharlalNehru Technological University, Anantapur,Rep.by its Registrar, Anantapur, Anantapur District.
Respondent
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI
WRIT PETITION NO. 7287 OF 2010 ORAL ORDER:
The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to pay the pension and pensionary and other attendant benefits, as per the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules, 1980.
The petitioner was appointed as Mechanic in the year 1963 in the respondent University and retired on attaining the age of 60 years, treating his age as 58 years. It is the case of the petitioner that the A.P. Revision Pension Rules, 1980 came into effect from 29.10.1979 and by virtue of transfer of the staff in terms of Statute XIV of the J.N.T.U. Act, 1972, the Rules applicable to the Government employees of Andhra Pradesh, are applicable to staff of the respondent University and hence, the A.P. Revised Pension Rules, 1980 are also applicable to the petitioner and, therefore, the action of the respondent in revising the age of superannuation from 60 to 58 under the guise of applicability of Rules of Pension and prescribing different ages for different categories of the same services on the basis of teaching and non- teaching cadres, amounts to discrimination.
Be that as it may, without adverting to the various contentions raised, the petitioner, on his own admission is aged 77 years. It is evident that the petitioner has slept over the issue, for about two decades without moving his little finger. Therefore, at this length of time, it is too late to canvass such an issue and agitate over his rights, if any. Therefore, without adverting to merits or otherwise of the contentions raised, the writ petition deserves dismissal on laches. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Justice T. Meena Kumari June 24, 2010 MAS
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Jawaharlalnehru Technological University

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
24 June, 2010
Judges
  • T Meena Kumari