Channa Basappa, Mahabubnagar Dist vs. Commissioner Of B.C. Welfare, Hyd And 3 Others

Facts

The petitioner, Channa Basappa, an Assistant B.C. Welfare Officer, filed a writ petition challenging a memo issued by the Commissioner of B.C. Welfare on October 22, 2013. This memo appears to have been related to the petitioner's promotion or continued service. The Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, in an interim order dated October 29, 2013, had suspended the impugned memo. The Tribunal's interim order recognized a degree certificate issued by Vinayaka Mission Research and Foundation as valid for employment in Andhra Pradesh, noting that the respondents had previously satisfied themselves about its genuineness when promoting the applicant. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner retired from service.

Held

The Court noted the submission by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation during the pendency of the writ petition. The Court also took into consideration the petitioner's submission that in view of the interim order dated October 29, 2013, passed by the then Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, no further orders were required in the writ petition. The Tribunal's interim order had suspended the impugned memo and recognized the degree certificate issued by Vinayaka Mission Research and Foundation as valid for employment. The Court recorded these submissions and closed the writ petition. No specific finding was made on the merits of the original challenge to the memo, as the matter was disposed of based on the petitioner's retirement and the existing interim order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the interim order passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal on October 29, 2013, which suspended the memo dated October 22, 2013, was legally sustainable, considering the recognition of the petitioner's degree certificate for employment purposes. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the Tribunal's interim order was justified as it was based on a clarification from the A.P. State Council of Higher Education and that the respondents had previously accepted the genuineness of the degree certificate. The petitioner further submitted that in light of their retirement, no further orders were required in the writ petition. Respondents' contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents regarding the sustainability of the interim order. The respondents were represented by the GP for Services.